Biblio

The celebrated Nakamoto consensus protocol [16] ushered in several new consensus applications including cryptocurrencies. A few recent works [7, 17] have analyzed important properties of blockchains, including most significantly, consistency, which is a guarantee that all honest parties output the same sequence of blocks throughout the execution of the protocol. To establish consistency, the prior analysis of Pass, Seeman and Shelat [17] required a careful counting of certain combinatorial events that was difficult to apply to variations of Nakamoto. The work of Garay, Kiayas, and Leonardas [7] provides another method of analyzing the blockchain under the simplifying assumption that the network was synchronous. The contribution of this paper is the development of a simple Markov-chain based method for analyzing consistency properties of blockchain protocols. The method includes a formal way of stating strong concentration bounds as well as easy ways to concretely compute the bounds. We use our new method to answer a number of basic questions about consistency of blockchains: Our new analysis provides a tighter guarantee on the consistency property of Nakamoto's protocol, including for parameter regimes which [17] could not consider; We analyze a family of delaying attacks first presented in [17], and extend them to other protocols; We analyze how long a participant should wait before considering a high-value transaction "confirmed"; We analyze the consistency of CliqueChain, a variation of the Chainweb [14] system; We provide the first rigorous consistency analysis of GHOST [20] and also analyze a folklore "balancing"-attack. In each case, we use our framework to experimentally analyze the consensus bounds for various network delay parameters and adversarial computing percentages. We hope our techniques enable authors of future blockchain proposals to provide a more rigorous analysis of their schemes.

Motivated by the growing complexity and heterogeneity of modern data centers, and the prevalence of commodity component failures, this paper studies the failure-aware placement problem of placing tasks of a parallel job on machines in the data center with the goal of increasing availability. We consider two models of failures: adversarial and probabilistic. In the adversarial model, each node has a weight (higher weight implying higher reliability) and the adversary can remove any subset of nodes of total weight at most a given bound W and our goal is to find a placement that incurs the least disruption against such an adversary. In the probabilistic model, each node has a probability of failure and we need to find a placement that maximizes the probability that at least K out of N tasks survive at any time. For adversarial failures, we first show that (i) the problems are in Σ2, the second level of the polynomial hierarchy, (ii) a basic variant, that we call RobustFAP, is co-NP-hard, and (iii) an all-or-nothing version of RobustFAP is Σ2-complete. We then give a PTAS for RobustFAP, a key ingredient of which is a solution that we design for a fractional version of RobustFAP. We then study fractional RobustFAP over hierarchies, denoted HierRobustFAP, and introduce a notion of hierarchical max-min fairness/ and a novel Generalized Spreading/ algorithm which is simultaneously optimal for all W. These generalize the classical notion of max-min fairness to work with nodes of differing capacities, differing reliability weights and hierarchical structures. Using randomized rounding, we extend this to give an algorithm for integral HierRobustFAP. For the probabilistic version, we first give an algorithm that achieves an additive ε approximation in the failure probability for the single level version, called ProbFAP, while giving up a (1 + ε) multiplicative factor in the number of failures. We then extend the result to the hierarchical version, HierProbFAP, achieving an ε additive approximation in failure probability while giving up an (L + ε) multiplicative factor in the number of failures, where \$L\$ is the number of levels in the hierarchy.