Randomized View Reconciliation in Permissionless Distributed Systems

In a sybil attack, an adversary creates a large number of fake identities/nodes and have them join the system. Computational puzzles have long been investigated as a possible sybil defense: If a node fails to solve the puzzle in a timely fashion, it will no longer be accepted by other nodes. However, it is still possible for a malicious node to behave in such a way that it is accepted by some honest nodes but not other honest nodes. This results in different honest nodes having different views on which set of nodes should form the system. Such view divergence, unfortunately, breaks the overarching assumption required by many existing security protocols. Partly spurred by the growing popularity of Bitcoin, researchers have recently formalized the above view divergence problem and proposed interesting solutions (which we call view reconciliation protocols). For example, in CRYPTO 2015, Andrychowicz and Dziembowski proposed a view reconciliation protocol with $\Theta(N)$ time complexity, with $N$ being the number of honest nodes in the system. All existing view reconciliation protocols so far have a similar $\Theta(N)$ time complexity. As this paper's main contribution, we propose a novel view reconciliation protocol with a time complexity of only $\Theta(\frac{\ln N}{\ln\ln N})$. To achieve such an exponential improvement, we aggressively exploit randomization.

[1]  Piotr Berman,et al.  Cloture Votes:n/4-resilient Distributed Consensus int + 1 rounds , 2005, Mathematical systems theory.

[2]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  Completeness Theorems for Non-Cryptographic Fault-Tolerant Distributed Computation (Extended Abstract) , 1988, STOC.

[3]  Satoshi Nakamoto Bitcoin : A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System , 2009 .

[4]  H. Rowaihy,et al.  Limiting Sybil Attacks in Structured Peer-to-Peer Networks , 2005 .

[5]  Andrew Chi-Chih Yao,et al.  Protocols for secure computations , 1982, FOCS 1982.

[6]  Michel Raynal Consensus in synchronous systems: a concise guided tour , 2002, 2002 Pacific Rim International Symposium on Dependable Computing, 2002. Proceedings..

[7]  Marcin Andrychowicz,et al.  PoW-Based Distributed Cryptography with No Trusted Setup , 2015, CRYPTO.

[8]  Moni Naor,et al.  Pebbling and Proofs of Work , 2005, CRYPTO.

[9]  John R. Douceur,et al.  The Sybil Attack , 2002, IPTPS.

[10]  Miguel Castro,et al.  Practical byzantine fault tolerance and proactive recovery , 2002, TOCS.

[11]  Anne-Marie Kermarrec,et al.  Highly dynamic distributed computing with byzantine failures , 2013, PODC '13.

[12]  Silvio Micali,et al.  How to play ANY mental game , 1987, STOC.

[13]  J. Aspnes,et al.  Exposing Computationally-Challenged Byzantine Impostors , 2005 .

[14]  Danny Dolev,et al.  Authenticated Algorithms for Byzantine Agreement , 1983, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  The Byzantine Generals Problem , 1982, TOPL.

[16]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  The Byzantine Firing Squad Problem. , 1985 .

[17]  Prateek Mittal,et al.  SybilControl: practical sybil defense with computational puzzles , 2012, STC '12.

[18]  Christian Scheideler,et al.  Towards a Scalable and Robust DHT , 2006, SPAA '06.

[19]  Leslie Lamport,et al.  Reaching Agreement in the Presence of Faults , 1980, JACM.

[20]  Nikita Borisov,et al.  Computational Puzzles as Sybil Defenses , 2006, Sixth IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P'06).

[21]  Ethan Heilman,et al.  Eclipse Attacks on Bitcoin's Peer-to-Peer Network , 2015, USENIX Security Symposium.

[22]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Random oracles are practical: a paradigm for designing efficient protocols , 1993, CCS '93.

[23]  Elaine Shi,et al.  Pseudonymous Secure Computation from Time-Lock Puzzles , 2014, IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch..

[24]  Moni Naor,et al.  Pricing via Processing or Combatting Junk Mail , 1992, CRYPTO.

[25]  Loi Luu,et al.  Randomized View Reconciliation in Permissionless Distributed Systems , 2020, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.