Paper detail

A Consensus Algorithm Based on Risk Assessment Model for Permissioned Blockchain

Blockchain technology enables stakeholders to conduct trusted data sharing and exchange without a trusted centralized institution. These features make blockchain applications attractive to enhance trustworthiness in very different contexts. Due to unique design concepts and outstanding performance, blockchain has become a popular research topic in industry and academia in recent years. Every participant is anonymous in a permissionless blockchain represented by cryptocurrency applications such as Bitcoin. In this situation, some special incentive mechanisms are applied to permissionless blockchain, such as mined native cryptocurrency to solve the trust issues of permissionless blockchain. In many use cases, permissionless blockchain has bottlenecks in transaction throughput performance, which restricts further application in the real world. A permissioned blockchain can reach a consensus among a group of entities that do not establish an entire trust relationship. Unlike permissionless blockchains, the participants must be identified in permissioned blockchains. By relying on the traditional crash fault-tolerant consensus protocols, permissioned blockchains can achieve high transaction throughput and low latency without sacrificing security. However, how to balance the security and consensus efficiency is still the issue that needs to be solved urgently in permissioned blockchains. As the core module of blockchain technology, the consensus algorithm plays a vital role in the performance of the blockchain system. Thus, this paper proposes a new consensus algorithm for permissioned blockchain, the Risk Assessment-based Consensus protocol (RAC), combined with the decentralized design concept and the risk-node assessment mechanism to address the unbalance issues of performance in speed, scalability, and security.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.