Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

BlockGraph: a scalable secure distributed ledger that exploits locality

  • Published:
Distributed and Parallel Databases Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Distributed public ledgers, the key to modern cryptocurrencies and the heart of many novel applications, have scalability problems. Ledgers such as the blockchain underlying Bitcoin can process fewer than 10 transactions per second (TPS). The cost of transactions is high, and the time to confirm a transaction is in the minutes. We present the BlockGraph, a scalable distributed public ledger inspired by principles of computer architecture. The BlockGraph exploits the natural locality of transactions to allow publishing independent transactions in parallel. It extends the blockchain with three new transactions to create a unified consistent ledger out of essentially independent blockchains. The most important change is the introduction of the blockstamp transaction, which essentially checkpoints a local blockchain and secures it against attack. The result is a locality-based, simple, secure, sharding protocol which keeps all transactions readable. This paper introduces the BlockGraph protocol, proves that it is consistent and can achieve many thousands of TPS. Using our implementation (a small extension to Bitcoin core) we demonstrate that it, in practice, can significantly improve throughput.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Likewise, global miners will also have less work, since they only need to verify the global chain and the local chains for which they are generating BSPs

  2. An ancestor-or-self block is the block or any of the block’s ancestors. Likewise, a descendant-or-self block is the block or any of its descendants.

  3. We use P2PKH as a canonical stand-in for all Bitcoin transactions, e.g., P2SH, Multisig, etc. since their semantics do not change on the BlockGraph as their inputs and outputs are all intra-chain.

  4. Recall that XDP on local chains do not have special requirements on its ITT inputs on the global chain.

  5. We do not count the small portion of BSPs on the global chain. And, this analysis is worse case in that we do not account for the advantage of using XATs .

  6. These numbers include the space that BSPs take up on the global chain, unlike the theorem.

References

  1. Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. bitcoin.org. (2008). https://bitcoin.org

  2. Croman, K., Decker, C., Eyal, I., Gencer, A., Juels, A., Kosba, A., Miller, A., Saxena, P., Shi, E., Sirer, E., Song, D., Wattenhofer, R.: On scaling decentralized blockchains (a position paper). In: Rohloff K, Clark J, Meiklejohn S, Wallach D, Brenner M, Ryan P (eds) Financial Cryptography and Data Security - International Workshops, FC 2016, BITCOIN, VOTING, and WAHC, Revised Selected Papers, Springer-Verlag, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), pp 106–125, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-53357-4_8, international Workshops on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, FC 2016 and 3rd Workshop on Bitcoin and Blockchain Research, BITCOIN 2016, 1st Workshop on Advances in Secure Electronic Voting Schemes, VOTING 2016, and 4th Workshop on Encrypted Computing and Applied Homomorphic Cryptography, WAHC 2016 ; Conference date: 26-02-2016 Through 26-02-2016(2016)

  3. Stoll, C., KlaaBen, L., Gallersdörfer, U.: The carbon footprint of bitcoin. SSRN Electron. J. (2019). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3335781

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Denning, P.J.: The locality principle. Commun. ACM 48(7), 19–24 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1145/1070838.1070856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Patterson, D., Hennessy, J.: Computer Organization and Design, 5th edn. Morgan Kaufmann (2013)

  6. Poon, J., Dryja, T.: The bitcoin lightning network: Scalable off-chain instant payments. (2016). https://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf

  7. Audit INP: Number of retail prescription drugs filled at pharmacies by payer. (2020). www.kff.org/health-costs/state-indicator/total-retail-rx-drugs

  8. Sompolinsky, Y., Zohar, A.: Secure high-rate transaction processing in bitcoin. Financ. Cryptogr. Springer Lecture Notes Compt. Sci. 8975, 507–527 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Buterin, V.: Ethereum: a next-generation smart contract and decentralized application platform. (2015). https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper

  10. Lewenberg, Y., Sompolinsky, Y., Zohar, A.: Inclusive block chain protocols. Financ. Cryptogr. Springer Lecture Notes Comput. Sci. 8975, 528–547 (2015)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Sompolinsky, Y., Lewenberg, Y., Zohar, A.: Spectre: a fast and scalable cryptocurrency protocol. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch. 2016, 1159 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Popov, S.: The tangle. White paper 1(3) (2018)

  13. Poon, J., Buterin, V.: Plasma: scalable autonomous smart contracts. plasma.io. (2017). www.plasma.io/plasma.pdf

  14. Herlihy, M.: Atomic cross-chain swaps. In: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM symposium on principles of distributed computing, pp. 245–254. (2018)

  15. Herlihy, M., Liskov, B., Shrira, L.: Cross-chain deals and adversarial commerce. VLDB J. 1–19 (2021)

  16. Zakhary, V., Agrawal, D., Abbadi, AE.: Atomic commitment across blockchains. (2019). arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.02847

  17. Back, A., Corallo, M., Dashjr, L., Friedenbach, M., Maxwell, G., Miller, A., Poelstra, A., Timón, J., Wuille, P.: Enabling blockchain innovations with pegged sidechains. (2014). blockstream.com/sidechains.pdf

  18. Nick, J., Poelstra, A., Sanders, G.: Liquid: a bitcoin sidechain (2020)

  19. Kwon, J., Buchman, E.: Cosmos whitepaper. (2019). v1.cosmos.network/resources/whitepaper

  20. Androulaki, E., Barger, A., Bortnikov, V., Cachin, C., Christidis, K., De Caro, A., Enyeart, D., Ferris, C., Laventman, G., Manevich, Y., et al.: Hyperledger fabric: a distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. In: Proceedings of the thirteenth EuroSys conference, pp 1–15 (2018)

  21. Karlsson, K., Jiang, W., Wicker, S., Adams, D., Ma, E., van Renesse, R., Weatherspoon, H.:Vegvisir: A partition-tolerant blockchain for the internet-of-things. In: 2018 IEEE 38th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), IEEE, pp. 1150–1158 (2018)

  22. Amiri, M.J., Agrawal, D., Abbadi, A.E.: Caper: a cross-application permissioned blockchain. Proc. VLDB Endowment 12(11), 1385–1398 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Amiri, M.J., Agrawal, D., El Abbadi, A.: Sharper: Sharding permissioned blockchains over network clusters. In: Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Management of Data, pp 76–88 (2021)

  24. Stathakopoulou, C., David, T., Pavlovic, M., Vukolić, M.: Mir-bft: high-throughput robust bft for decentralized networks. (2019). arXiv:1906.05552

  25. Tao, Y., Li, B., Jiang, J., Ng, HC., Wang, C., Li, B.: On sharding open blockchains with smart contracts. In: 36th IEEE International Conference on Data Engineering, ICDE 2020, pp. 1357–1368. IEEE, Dallas, TX (2020). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICDE48307.2020.00121

  26. Skidanov, A.: Unsolved problems in blockchain sharding. (2018). medium.com/nearprotocol/unsolved-problems-in-blockchain-sharding-2327d6517f43. Accessed 15 April 2020

  27. Luu, L., Narayanan, V., Zheng, C., Baweja, K., Gilbert, S., Saxena, P.: A secure sharding protocol for open blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 17–30. ACM, New York (2016). https://doi.org/10.1145/2976749.2978389

  28. Zamani, M., Movahedi, M., Raykova, M.:Rapidchain: Scaling blockchain via full sharding. In: Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 931–948. New York, N Y(2018). https://doi.org/10.1145/3243734.3243853

  29. Buterin, V .: Ethereum 2.0 mauve paper. (2016). cdn.hackaday.io/files/10879465447136/Mauve%20Paper%20Vitalik.pdf

  30. Chohan: The limits to blockchain? scaling vs. decentralization. (2019). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3338560

  31. Rosenfeld, M.: Analysis of hashrate-based double spending. CoRR abs/1402.2009. (2014). http://dblp.uni-trier.de/db/journals/corr/corr1402.html#Rosenfeld14

  32. Kiayias, A., Russell, A., David, B., Oliynykov, R.: Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In: Annual International Cryptology Conference, Springer, pp. 357–388 (2017)

  33. King, S., Nadal, S.: Ppcoin: peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof-of-stake. self-published paper. (2012)

  34. Vasin, P.: Blackcoin’s proof-of-stake protocol v2. (2014). blackcoin.co/blackcoin-pos-protocol-v2-whitepaper.pdf

  35. Vasek, M., Thornton, M., Moore, T.: Empirical analysis of denial-of-service attacks in the bitcoin ecosystem. In: International conference on financial cryptography and data security, Springer, pp. 57–71 (2014)

  36. Tschorsch, F., Scheuermann, B.: Bitcoin and beyond: a technical survey on decentralized digital currencies. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutor. 18(3), 2084–2123 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. bitcoincoreorg: Bitcoin core integration/staging tree. Github Repository. (2021). https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Computer Science Department, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Seth Copen Goldstein & Sixiang Gao

  2. Department of Computer Science and Technology, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China

    Zhenbo Sun

Authors
  1. Seth Copen Goldstein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sixiang Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhenbo Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Seth Copen Goldstein.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Goldstein, S.C., Gao, S. & Sun, Z. BlockGraph: a scalable secure distributed ledger that exploits locality. Distrib Parallel Databases 42, 217–244 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-022-07411-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10619-022-07411-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation