Scalable communication middleware for permissioned distributed ledgers

Barger, Artem; Manevich, Yacov; Mandler, Benjamin; Bortnikov, Vita; Laventman, Gennady; Chockler, Gregory

doi:10.1145/3078468.3078492

Cited by 12 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such inconsistent states, in turn, support successful attacks (see chapter 2.4.1). Thus, forkable DLT designs based on PoW can only improve the transaction throughput by degrading consistency (and increasing vulnerability) [13].…”

Section: F2 Throughput Vs Consistencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade-offs between Distributed Ledger Technology Characteristics

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When developing peer-to-peer applications on distributed ledger technology (DLT), a crucial decision is the selection of a suitable DLT design (e.g., Ethereum), because it is hard to change the underlying DLT design post hoc. To facilitate the selection of suitable DLT designs, we review DLT characteristics and identify tradeoffs between them. Furthermore, we assess how DLT designs account for these trade-offs and we develop archetypes for DLT designs that cater to specific requirements of applications on DLT. The main purpose of our article is to introduce scientific and practical audiences to the intricacies of DLT designs and to support development of viable applications on DLT.

show abstract

Section: F2 Throughput Vs Consistencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Trade-offs between Distributed Ledger Technology Characteristics

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Many consensus mechanisms are proposed, such as PoW (Proof of Work) [4], PoS (Proof of Stake) [9], DPoS (Delegated Proof of Stake) [8], and Algorand [12] recently presented. Some classical consistency algorithms like PBFT [10] (practical byzantine fault tolerance) are used as well. Furthermore, a few researchers make performance monitoring [37], [38] and try to improve existing mechanisms [11], [45].…”

Section: A Blockchain Systemsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A first look at blockchain‐based decentralized applications

Huang

et al. 2019

Softw Pract Exp

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With the increasing popularity of blockchain technologies in recent years, blockchain-based decentralized applications (DApps for short in this paper) have been rapidly developed and widely adopted in many areas, being a hot topic in both academia and industry. Despite of the importance of DApps, we still have quite little understanding of DApps along with its ecosystem. To bridge the knowledge gap, this paper presents the first comprehensive empirical study of blockchain-based DApps to date, based on an extensive dataset of 995 Ethereum DApps and 29,846,075 transaction logs over them. We make a descriptive analysis of the popularity of DApps, summarize the patterns of how DApps use smart contracts to access the underlying blockchain, and explore the worth-addressing issues of deploying and operating DApps. Based on the findings, we propose some implications for DApp users to select proper DApps, for DApp developers to improve the efficiency of DApps, and for blockchain vendors to enhance the support of DApps.Index Terms-decentralized applications, Ethereum, smart contract, empirical study • RQ1: How is the popularity of DApps distributed?We explore the popularity of DApps by the number of unique users, transactions, and transaction volumes, and compare categories of DApps. We also examine the change of popularity as time evolves. By answering this question, we can provide an overview of the DApp market for all stakeholders in the DApp ecosystem. • RQ2: Are there any common practices of developing DApps? We investigate whether DApps are open source and how smart contracts are organized in a DApp. By answering this question, we can reveal the development arXiv:1909.00939v1 [cs.SE]

show abstract

“…Clients submit transactions created in the endorsement phase to the ordering service. For efficiency, transactions are distributed among all peers in batches or blocks, using a gossip protocol [6].…”

Section: Hyperledger Fabricmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blockchain and Trusted Computing: Problems, Pitfalls, and a Solution for Hyperledger Fabric

Brandenburger,

Cachin,

Kapitza

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A smart contract on a blockchain cannot keep a secret because its data is replicated on all nodes in a network. To remedy this problem, it has been suggested to combine blockchains with trusted execution environments (TEEs), such as Intel SGX, for executing applications that demand privacy. As a consequence untrusted blockchain nodes cannot get access to the data and computations inside the TEE.This paper first explores some pitfalls that arise from the combination of TEEs with blockchains. Since smart contracts executed inside TEEs are, in principle, stateless they are susceptible to rollback attacks, which should be prevented to maintain privacy for the application. However, in blockchains with non-final consensus protocols, such as the proof-of-work in Ethereum and others, the contract execution must handle rollbacks by design. This implies that TEEs for securing blockchain execution cannot be directly used for such blockchains; this approach works only when the consensus decisions are final.Second, this work introduces an architecture and a prototype for smart-contract execution within Intel SGX technology for Hyperledger Fabric, a prominent enterprise blockchain platform. Our system resolves difficulties posed by the execute-order-validate architecture of Fabric, prevents rollback attacks on TEE-based execution as far as possible, and minimizes the trusted computing base. For increasing security, our design encapsulates each application on the blockchain within its own enclave that shields it from the host system. An evaluation shows that the overhead moving execution into SGX is within 10%-20% for a sealed-bid auction application.

show abstract

Scalable communication middleware for permissioned distributed ledgers

Cited by 12 publications

References 1 publication

Trade-offs between Distributed Ledger Technology Characteristics

Trade-offs between Distributed Ledger Technology Characteristics

A first look at blockchain‐based decentralized applications

Blockchain and Trusted Computing: Problems, Pitfalls, and a Solution for Hyperledger Fabric

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About