Paper detail

On the Feasibility of Sybil Attacks in Shard-Based Permissionless Blockchains

Bitcoin's single leader consensus protocol (Nakamoto consensus) suffers from significant transaction throughput and network scalability issues due to the computational requirements of it Proof-of-Work (PoW) based leader selection strategy. To overcome this, committee-based approaches (e.g., Elastico) that partition the outstanding transaction set into shards and (randomly) select multiple committees to process these transactions in parallel have been proposed and have become very popular. However, by design these committee or shard-based blockchain solutions are easily vulnerable to the Sybil attacks, where an adversary can easily compromise/manipulate the consensus protocol if it has enough computational power to generate multiple Sybil committee members (by generating multiple valid node identifiers). Despite the straightforward nature of these attacks, they have not been systematically analyzed. In this paper, we fill this research gap by modelling and analyzing Sybil attacks in a representative and popular shard-based protocol called Elastico. We show that the PoW technique used for identifier or ID generation in the initial phase of the protocol is vulnerable to Sybil attacks, and a node with high hash-power can generate enough Sybil IDs to successfully compromise Elastico. We analytically derive conditions for two different categories of Sybil attacks and perform numerical simulations to validate our theoretical results under different network and protocol parameters.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.