[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/biz/ - Business & Finance

Search:


View post   

>> No.19775125 [View]
File: 63 KB, 868x869, WHAAAAAT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
19775125

>>19775087
intentional
Mt. Gox came back to shit on the market again
they still have their stolen funds ready to dump during the next run
they're brazen

>> No.17594117 [View]
File: 63 KB, 868x869, WHAAAAAT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
17594117

>>17593851
The abstraction of state machine replication has been investigated in cryptography and distributed systems literature for the past three decades. At a high level, the goal of a state machine replication protocol is for a set of nodes to agree on an ever-growing, linearly ordered log of messages (transactions).

Two properties need to be satisfied by such a protocol: (1) Consistency - all honest nodes
must have the same view of the agreed upon log — that is, they must output messages in the same order; and (2) Liveness - messages submitted by clients are added to the log within a reasonable amount of time. In this paper, we will use the terms state machine replication and consensus2 interchangeably.

Unfortunately, neither consistency nor liveness says anything about the actual ordering of transactions in the final log. A protocol that ensures that all nodes agree on the same ordering is deemed consistent regardless of how the ordering is generated. This leaves room for the definition to be satisfied even if an adversary directly chooses the actual transaction ordering, which is discomforting
considering that the ordering is often easy to manipulate [10]. Moreover, in all existing protocols that rely on a designated “leader” node (e.g., [16, 35, 45]), which includes most used in practice, an adversarial leader may choose to propose transactions in any order.
In this paper, we formulate a new property for byzantine consensus which we call order-fairness.

Intuitively, order-fairness denotes the notion that if a large number of nodes receive a transaction tx1 before another one tx2, then this should somehow be reflected in the final ordering.


Ari and his ace-team of crack cryptographers hitting another one out of the park
good work gentlemen

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]