Making CRDTs Byzantine fault tolerant

Kleppmann, Martin

doi:10.1145/3517209.3524042

Cited by 10 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Similarly to Bitcoin, the underlying network protocol replicates on each peer the full state of the Merkle-DAG representing the causal relationships between posts. When peers synchronize, they mutually exchange missing branches such that they reach the same DAG structure [9]. As they synchronize, each peer runs the consensus algorithm locally and verifies if all received posts are consistent.…”

Section: Peer Synchronization and Byzantine Faultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Peer-to-Peer Permissionless Consensus via Reputation

Sant’Anna,

Bosisio,

Pires

2023

Anais Do XXIII Simpósio Brasileiro De Segurança Da Informação E De Sistemas Computacionais (SBSeg 2023)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public Internet forums suffer from excess and abuse, such as SPAM and fake news. Centralized platforms employ filtering and anti-abuse policies, but imply full trust from users. We propose a permissionless Sybil-resistant peer-to-peer protocol for content sharing. Our main contribution is a reputation system that moderates content and, at the same time, delivers network consensus. We can trace a parallel with Bitcoin as follows: consolidated posts create reputation (vs proof-of-work), likes and dislikes transfer reputation (vs transactions), and aggregate reputation determines consensus (vs longest chain). The reputation mechanism depends exclusively on the human authoring ability (proof-of-authoring), which is slow and scarce, thus suitable to establish consensus.

show abstract

Section: Peer Synchronization and Byzantine Faultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In decentralized systems, however, none of these demands are easily accomplished. A common approach in gossiping protocols is to proactively disseminate posts among peers until they reach all users [19,9]. However, gossiping does not guarantee consensus since posts can be received in conflicting orders [17].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%