It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
The core of many cryptocurrencies is the decentralised validation network operating on proof-of-work technology. In these systems, validation is done by so-called miners who can digitally sign blocks once they solve a computationally-hard problem. Conventional wisdom generally considers this protocol as secure and stable as miners are incentivised to follow the behaviour of the majority. However, whether some strategic mining behaviours occur in practice is still a major concern. In this paper we target this question by focusing on a security threat: a selfish mining attack in which malicious miners deviate from protocol by not immediately revealing their newly mined blocks. We propose a statistical test to analyse each miner’s behaviour in five popular cryptocurrencies: Bitcoin, Litecoin, Monacoin, Ethereum and Bitcoin Cash. Our method is based on the realisation that selfish mining behaviour will cause identifiable anomalies in the statistics of miner’s successive blocks discovery. Secondly, we apply heuristics-based address clustering to improve the detectability of this kind of behaviour. We find a marked presence of abnormal miners in Monacoin and Bitcoin Cash, and, to a lesser extent, in Ethereum. Finally, we extend our method to detect coordinated selfish mining attacks, finding mining cartels in Monacoin where miners might secretly share information about newly mined blocks in advance. Our analysis contributes to the research on security in cryptocurrency systems by providing the first empirical evidence that the aforementioned strategic mining behaviours do take place in practice.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 University of Zurich, Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Technologies, Faculty of Business, Economics and Informatics, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650); University of Zurich, UZH Blockchain Center, Faculty of Business, Economics and Informatics, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650)
2 University of Zurich, Blockchain and Distributed Ledger Technologies, Faculty of Business, Economics and Informatics, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650); University of Zurich, UZH Blockchain Center, Faculty of Business, Economics and Informatics, Zurich, Switzerland (GRID:grid.7400.3) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0650); DLT Science Foundation, London, UK (GRID:grid.7400.3); University College London, Institute of Finance and Technology, London, United Kingdom (GRID:grid.83440.3b) (ISNI:0000 0001 2190 1201)