Comparative Analysis of Bitcoin and Ethereum

Since Bitcoin was launched in 2009, several new cryptocurrencies have been initiated with variations to Bitcoin’s original design. Although Bitcoin still remains the most prominent actor in the market, some technical problems have been raised to the design of the protocol. The objective of this thesis is to determine whether the newer cryptocurrencies handle the technical problems of Bitcoin, or if they also suffer from the same issues. Instead of evaluating several cryptocurrencies for this comparison, the cryptocurrency Ethereum has been chosen as a proxy for the others. Ethereum was started in 2014, is widely backed in the community and is second in line to Bitcoin when it comes to market capitalization. As a basis for the comparative analysis a rigorous study of the Bitcoin and Ethereum protocols have been performed, and parallel descriptions of the systems have been devised. Three technical problem have shaped the focus of the analysis: computational waste, concentration of power and ambiguity of transactions. Real world statistical data has been gathered and synthesized to enlighten the findings in the comparison. The main result of the comparison is that both systems suffer from the same problems to a certain degree, due to the fact that they utilize the same consensus mechanism. However, Ethereum utilizes several newer techniques to try and reduce the severity of these problems compared to Bitcoin, with varying degrees of success.

[1]  Gerd Folkers,et al.  On computable numbers , 2016 .

[2]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[3]  Burton H. Bloom,et al.  Space/time trade-offs in hash coding with allowable errors , 1970, CACM.

[4]  Daniel Davis Wood,et al.  ETHEREUM: A SECURE DECENTRALISED GENERALISED TRANSACTION LEDGER , 2014 .

[5]  Tanja Lange,et al.  Dual EC: A Standardized Back Door , 2015, The New Codebreakers.

[6]  A. Turing.  On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem. , 1937 .

[7]  Kazumaro Aoki,et al.  SEC X.2: Recommended Elliptic Curve Domain Parameters , 2008 .

[8]  Marcel Worring,et al.  NIST Special Publication , 2005 .

[9]  Morris J. Dworkin,et al.  SHA-3 Standard: Permutation-Based Hash and Extendable-Output Functions , 2015 .

[10]  P. Libby.  The Scientific American , 1881, Nature.

[11]  Paul E. Hoffman,et al.  Attacks on Cryptographic Hashes in Internet Protocols , 2005, RFC.

[12]  Arvind Narayanan,et al.  Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies - A Comprehensive Introduction , 2016 .

[13]  James H. Burrows,et al.  Secure Hash Standard , 1995 .

[14]  Donald R. Morrison,et al.  PATRICIA—Practical Algorithm To Retrieve Information Coded in Alphanumeric , 1968, J. ACM.

[15]  Douglas R. Stinson,et al.  Cryptography: Theory and Practice , 1995 .

[16]  Emin Gün Sirer,et al.  Majority Is Not Enough: Bitcoin Mining Is Vulnerable , 2013, Financial Cryptography.

[17]  Axthonv G. Oettinger,et al.  IEEE Transactions on Information Theory , 1998 .

[18]  Adi Shamir,et al.  PayWord and MicroMint: Two Simple Micropayment Schemes , 1996, Security Protocols Workshop.

[19]  Dirk Fox,et al.  Digital Signature Standard (DSS) , 2001, Datenschutz und Datensicherheit.

[20]  Quynh Dang,et al.  Changes in Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) 180-4, Secure Hash Standard , 2013, Cryptologia.

[21]  Bart Preneel,et al.  RIPEMD-160: A Strengthened Version of RIPEMD , 1996, FSE.

[22]  Silvio Micali,et al.  ALGORAND: The Efficient and Democratic Ledger , 2016, ArXiv.