skip to main content
10.1145/3419111.3421283acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmodConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Shrec: bandwidth-efficient transaction relay in high-throughput blockchain systems

Published:12 October 2020Publication History

ABSTRACT

The success of Bitcoin and Ethereum has attracted many efforts to build high-throughput blockchain systems. This paper focuses on transaction dissemination --- a rather overlooked issue in these systems. We argue that efficient transaction dissemination is the key for a blockchain system to sustain at high-throughput --- usually thousands of transactions per second --- and the existing solutions fell short at doing so.

This paper presents Shrec, a novel transaction relay protocol for high-throughput blockchain systems built around a hybrid transaction hashing scheme that has a low hash collision rate, is resilient to collision attacks, and is fast to construct. Our experiments demonstrate that when propagating transactions, Shrec utilizes network efficiently: compared to alternative designs, Shrec reduces the bandwidth consumption by 60% at modest CPU overhead and improves the system throughput by up to 90%.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

p238-han-presentation.mp4

mp4

174.1 MB

References

  1. 2020. Ethereum White Paper. https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Marcin Andrychowicz, Stefan Dziembowski, Daniel Malinowski, and Lukasz Mazurek. 2015. On the Malleability of Bitcoin Transactions.. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Maria Apostolaki, Aviv Zohar, and Laurent Vanbever. 2017. Hijacking Bitcoin: Routing Attacks on Cryptocurrencies. In IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jean-Philippe Aumasson and Daniel J. Bernstein. 2012. SipHash: A Fast Short-Input PRF. In Progress in Cryptology - INDOCRYPT 2012, Steven Galbraith and Mridul Nandi (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 489--508.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Vivek Bagaria, Sreeram Kannan, David Tse, Giulia Fanti, and Pramod Viswanath. 2019. Prism: Deconstructing the Blockchain to Approach Physical Limits. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (London, United Kingdom) (CCS '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 585--602. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Alex Biryukov, Dmitry Khovratovich, and Ivan Pustogarov. 2014. Deanonymisation of Clients in Bitcoin P2P Network. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (Scottsdale, Arizona, USA) (CCS '14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 15--29. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Joseph Bonneau. 2016. Why buy when you can rent? Bribery attacks on bitcoin-style consensus. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security - International Workshops, FC 2016, BITCOIN, VOTING, and WAHC, Revised Selected Papers (Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), Vol. 9604 LNCS). Springer Verlag, Germany, 19--26.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. JP Buntinx. 2017. F2Pool Allegedly Prevented Users From Investing in Status ICO. https://themerkle.com/f2pool-allegedly-prevented-users-from-investing-in-status-ico/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Justin Cappos and John H. Hartman. 2008. San Fermín: Aggregating Large Data Sets Using a Binomial Swap Forest. In Proceedings of the 5th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (San Francisco, California) (NSDI'08). USENIX Association, USA, 147--160.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Miguel Castro, Peter Druschel, Anne-Marie Kermarrec, Animesh Nandi, Antony Rowstron, and Atul Singh. 2003. SplitStream: high-bandwidth multicast in cooperative environments. In Proceedings ofthe 19th ACM symposium on Operating Systems Principles. ACM, 298--313.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Ian Clarke, Oskar Sandberg, Brandon Wiley, and Theodore W. Hong. 2001. Freenet: A Distributed Anonymous Information Storage and Retrieval System. In International Workshop on Designing Privacy Enhancing Technologies: Design Issues in Anonymity and Unobservability (Berkeley, California, USA). Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 46--66. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=371931.371977Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Matt Corallo. 2017. Compact block relay. BIP 152. https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0152.mediawiki.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. corbixgwelt. 2011. Timejacking and bitcoin. http://culubas.blogspot.de/2011/05/timejacking-bitcoin_802.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Christian Decker and Roger Wattenhofer. 2013. Information propagation in the Bitcoin network. IEEE P2P 2013 Proceedings. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Christian Decker and Roger Wattenhofer. 2014. Bitcoin Transaction Malleability and MtGox. CoRR abs/1403.6676 (2014). arXiv:1403.6676 http://arxiv.org/abs/1403.6676Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Deloitte. 2017. 5 blockchain technology use cases in financial services. http://blog.deloitte.com.ng/5-blockchain-use-cases-in-financial-services/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Deloitte. 2018. Blockchain: Opportunities for health care. https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/public-sector/articles/blockchain-opportunities-for-health-care.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Alan Demers, Dan Greene, Carl Hauser, Wes Irish, John Larson, Scott Shenker, Howard Sturgis, Dan Swinehart, and Doug Terry. 1987. Epidemic algorithms for replicated database maintenance. In Proceedings of the sixth annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Yevgeniy Dodis, Leonid Reyzin, and Adam Smith. 2004. Fuzzy Extractors: How to Generate Strong Keys from Biometrics and Other Noisy Data. In Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2004, Christian Cachin and Jan L. Camenisch (Eds.). Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 523--540.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. DwarfPool. 2016. Why DwarfPool mines mostly empty blocks and only few ones with transactions. https://www.reddit.com/r/ethereum/comments/57c1yn/why_dwarfpool_mines_mostly_empty_blocks_and_only/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Morris J. Dworkin. 2015. SHA-3 Standard: Permutation-Based Hash and Extendable-Output Functions. Federal Inf. Process. STDS. (NIST FIPS) (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Ittay Eyal, Adem Efe Gencer, Emin Gün Sirer, and Robbert Van Renesse. 2016. Bitcoin-NG: A Scalable Blockchain Protocol.. In NSDI. 45--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Arthur Gervais, Hubert Ritzdorf, Ghassan O. Karame, and Srdjan Capkun. 2015. Tampering with the Delivery of Blocks and Transactions in Bitcoin. In Proceedings of the 22Nd ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (Denver, Colorado, USA) (CCS '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 692--705. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Yossi Gilad, Rotem Hemo, Silvio Micali, Georgios Vlachos, and Nickolai Zeldovich. 2017. Algorand: Scaling byzantine agreements for cryptocurrencies. In Proceedings of the 26th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles. ACM, 51--68.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Ethan Heilman, Alison Kendler, Aviv Zohar, and Sharon Goldberg. 2015. Eclipse Attacks on Bitcoin's Peer-to-Peer Network. In 24th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 15). USENIX Association, Washington, D.C., 129--144. https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity15/technical-sessions/presentation/heilmanGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. IBM. 2020. Blockchain for Supply Chain. https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/supply-chain/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Benjamin Johnson, Aron Laszka, Jens Grossklags, Marie Vasek, and Tyler Moore. 2014. Game-Theoretic Analysis of DDoS Attacks Against Bitcoin Mining Pools.. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Eleftherios Kokoris Kogias, Philipp Jovanovic, Nicolas Gailly, Ismail Khoffi, Linus Gasser, and Bryan Ford. 2016. Enhancing bitcoin security and performance with strong consistency via collective signing. In 25th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 16). 279--296.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogias, Philipp Jovanovic, Linus Gasser, Nicolas Gailly, Ewa Syta, and Bryan Ford. 2018. Omniledger: A secure, scale-out, decentralized ledger via sharding. In 2018 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 583--598.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Philip Koshy, Diana Koshy, and Patrick McDaniel. 2014. An Analysis of Anonymity in Bitcoin Using P2P Network Traffic.. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. P. Kumar, G. Sridhar, and V. Sridhar. 2005. Bandwidth and latency model for DHT based peer-to-peer networks under variable churn. In 2005 Systems Communications (ICW'05, ICHSN'05, ICMCS'05, SENET'05). 320--325. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Derek Leung, Adam Suhl, Yossi Gilad, and Nickolai Zeldovich. 2018. Vault: Fast Bootstrapping for Cryptocurrencies. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2018 (2018), 269.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Yoad Lewenberg, Yonatan Sompolinsky, and Aviv Zohar. 2015. Inclusive block chain protocols. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 528--547.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. Chenxing Li, Peilun Li, Dong Zhou, Wei Xu, Fan Long, and Andrew Yao. 2018. Scaling Nakamoto Consensus to Thousands of Transactions per Second. arXiv preprint arXiv:1805.03870 (2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Jinyang Li, Jeremy Stribling, Robert Morris, and M. Frans Kaashoek. 2005. Bandwidth-efficient Management of DHT Routing Tables. In Proceedings of the 2Nd Conference on Symposium on Networked Systems Design & Implementation - Volume 2 (NSDI'05). USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 99--114. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1251203.1251211Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Yuval Marcus, Ethan Heilman, and Sharon Goldberg. 2018. Low-Resource Eclipse Attacks on Ethereum's Peer-to-Peer Network. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2018/236. https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/236.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Petar Maymounkov and David Mazières. 2002. Kademlia: A Peer-to-Peer Information System Based on the XOR Metric. In Peer-to-Peer Systems (Druschel P., Kaashoek F., Rowstron A. (eds). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg). Springer Verlag.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. David Mazieres. 2015. The stellar consensus protocol: A federated model for internet-level consensus. Stellar Development Foundation (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Patrick McCorry, Siamak F. Shahandashti, and Feng Hao. 2016. Refund attacks on Bitcoin's Payment Protocol. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2016 (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Ralph C Merkle. 1987. A digital signature based on a conventional encryption function. In Conference on the theory and application of cryptographic techniques. Springer, 369--378.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Andrew Miller, Yu Xia, Kyle Croman, Elaine Shi, and Dawn Song. 2016. The honey badger of BFT protocols. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, 31--42.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Satoshi Nakamoto. 2008. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Gleb Naumenko, Gregory Maxwell, Pieter Wuille, Alexandra Fedorova, and Ivan Beschastnikh. 2019. Erlay: Efficient Transaction Relay for Bitcoin. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (London, United Kingdom) (CCS '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 817--831. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  44. Till Neudecker. 2019. Characterization of the Bitcoin Peer-to-Peer Network (2015--2018). http://dsn.tm.kit.edu/bitcoin/publications/bitcoin_network_characterization.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Till Neudecker, Philipp Andelfinger, and Hannes Hartenstein. 2016. Timing Analysis for Inferring the Topology of the Bitcoin Peer-to-Peer Network. In 2016 International IEEE Conference on Advanced and Trusted Computing (ATC). 358--367. Received Best Paper Award. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  46. Rafael Pass and Elaine Shi. 2017. Fruitchains: A fair blockchain. In Proceedings ofthe ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing. ACM, 315--324.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Rafael Pass and Elaine Shi. 2017. Hybrid consensus: Efficient consensus in the permissionless model. In LIPIcs-Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics, Vol. 91. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Soujanya Ponnapalli, Aashaka Shah, Amy Tai, Souvik Banerjee, Vijay Chidambaram, Dahlia Malkhi, and Michael Wei. 2019. Scalable and Efficient Data Authentication for Decentralized Systems. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.11590 (2019).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Antony Rowstron and Peter Druschel. 2001. Pastry: Scalable, Decentralized Object Location and Routing for Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science - LNCS 2218 (01 2001), 329--350.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. SECBIT. 2018. How the winner got Fomo3D prize - A Detailed Explanation. https://medium.com/coinmonks/how-the-winner-got-fomo3d-prize-a-detailed-explanation-b30a69b7813f.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. Yonatan Sompolinsky, Shai Wyborski, and Aviv Zohar. 2020. PHANTOM and GHOSTDAG, A Scalable Generalization of Nakamoto Consensus. (2020). https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/104.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. Yonatan Sompolinsky and Aviv Zohar. 2015. Secure high-rate transaction processing in bitcoin. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security. Springer, 507--527.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Ion Stoica, Robert Morris, David Karger, M. Frans Kaashoek, and Hari Balakrishnan. 2001. Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications. In Proceedings ofthe 2001 Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communications (San Diego, California, USA) (SIGCOMM '01). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 149--160. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. V. Venkataraman, K. Yoshida, and P. Francis. 2006. Chunkyspread: Heterogeneous Unstructured Tree-Based Peer-to-Peer Multicast. In Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols. 2--11.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. S. Vuong and J. Li. 2003. Efa: an efficient content routing algorithm in large peer-to-peer overlay networks. In Proceedings Third International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P2003). 216--217. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. Jiaping Wang and Hao Wang. 2019. Monoxide: Scale out Blockchains with Asynchronous Consensus Zones. In 16th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 19). USENIX Association, Boston, MA, 95--112. https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi19/presentation/wang-jiapingGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Haifeng Yu, Ivica Nikolic, Ruomu Hou, and Prateek Saxena. 2020. OHIE: Blockchain Scaling Made Simple. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Shrec: bandwidth-efficient transaction relay in high-throughput blockchain systems

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            SoCC '20: Proceedings of the 11th ACM Symposium on Cloud Computing
            October 2020
            535 pages
            ISBN:9781450381376
            DOI:10.1145/3419111

            Copyright © 2020 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 12 October 2020

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • research-article

            Acceptance Rates

            SoCC '20 Paper Acceptance Rate35of143submissions,24%Overall Acceptance Rate169of722submissions,23%

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader