Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Condorcet Attack Against Fair Transaction Ordering

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 2306.15743 v1 pith:TP2YKU3B submitted 2023-06-27 cs.CR cs.DC

classification cs.CRcs.DC
keywords attackcondorcetsystemcycletransactionadversaryfairordering
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

We introduce the Condorcet attack, a new threat to fair transaction ordering. Specifically, the attack undermines batch-order-fairness, the strongest notion of transaction fair ordering proposed to date. The batch-order-fairness guarantees that a transaction tx is ordered before tx' if a majority of nodes in the system receive tx before tx'; the only exception (due to an impossibility result) is when tx and tx' fall into a so-called "Condorcet cycle". When this happens, tx and tx' along with other transactions within the cycle are placed in a batch, and any unfairness inside a batch is ignored. In the Condorcet attack, an adversary attempts to undermine the system's fairness by imposing Condorcet cycles to the system. In this work, we show that the adversary can indeed impose a Condorcet cycle by submitting as few as two otherwise legitimate transactions to the system. Remarkably, the adversary (e.g., a malicious client) can achieve this even when all the nodes in the system behave honestly. A notable feature of the attack is that it is capable of "trapping" transactions that do not naturally fall inside a cycle, i.e. those that are transmitted at significantly different times (with respect to the network latency). To mitigate the attack, we propose three methods based on three different complementary approaches. We show the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation methods through simulations, and explain their limitations.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Time Is Money: Incentivized Causal Transaction Ordering

    cs.CR 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A power-weighted randomized lottery with superlinear bid weights lets a user deter front-runners with a single bid that forms a subgame-perfect equilibrium.

  2. Ordering by Unanimity: Giving Applications Sequencing Rights Without Breaking Composability

    cs.DC 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The unanimity override algorithm lets blockchain applications express transaction ordering preferences and provably protects single-opinion and gated transactions against adversarial reordering.

  3. Ordering by Unanimity: Giving Applications Sequencing Rights Without Breaking Composability

    cs.DC 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A unanimity-based transaction ordering rule that provably protects single-application and gated transactions from any attacker, with a matching impossibility result for everything else.

Pith tools