Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Linear Consistency for Proof-of-Stake Blockchains

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1911.10187 v1 pith:5CS2DHCT submitted 2019-11-22 cs.CR cs.DM

Linear Consistency for Proof-of-Stake Blockchains

classification cs.CR cs.DM
keywords consistencydepthachieveblockchainsprotocolsalgorithmsassociatedblockchain
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The blockchain data structure maintained via the longest-chain rule---popularized by Bitcoin---is a powerful algorithmic tool for consensus algorithms. Such algorithms achieve consistency for blocks in the chain as a function of their depth from the end of the chain. While the analysis of Bitcoin guarantees consistency with error $2^{-k}$ for blocks of depth $O(k)$, the state-of-the-art of proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchains suffers from a quadratic dependence on $k$: these protocols, exemplified by Ouroboros (Crypto 2017), Ouroboros Praos (Eurocrypt 2018) and Sleepy Consensus (Asiacrypt 2017), can only establish that depth $\Theta(k^2)$ is sufficient. Whether this quadratic gap is an intrinsic limitation of PoS---due to issues such as the nothing-at-stake problem---has been an urgent open question, as deployed PoS blockchains further rely on consistency for protocol correctness. We give an axiomatic theory of blockchain dynamics that permits rigorous reasoning about the longest-chain rule and achieve, in broad generality, $\Theta(k)$ dependence on depth in order to achieve consistency error $2^{-k}$. In particular, for the first time, we show that PoS protocols can match proof-of-work protocols for linear consistency. We analyze the associated stochastic process, give a recursive relation for the critical functionals of this process, and derive tail bounds in both i.i.d. and martingale settings via associated generating functions.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.