TY - GEN
T1 - An eye for an eye
T2 - 1st ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies, AFT 2019
AU - Kwon, Yujin
AU - Kim, Hyoungshick
AU - Yi, Yung
AU - Kim, Yongdae
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 Association for Computing Machinery.
PY - 2019/10/21
Y1 - 2019/10/21
N2 - Currently, miners typically join mining pools to solve cryptographic puzzles together, and mining pools are in high competition. This has led to the development of several attack strategies such as block withholding (BWH) and fork after withholding (FAW) attacks that can weaken the health of PoW systems and but maximize mining pools’ profits. In this paper, we present strategies called Adaptive Retaliation Strategies (ARS) to mitigate not only BWH attacks but also FAW attacks. In ARS, each pool cooperates with other pools in the normal situation, and adaptively executes either FAW or BWH attacks for the purpose of retaliation only when attacked. In addition, in order for rational pools to adopt ARS, ARS should strike to an adaptive balance between retaliation and selfishness because the pools consider their payoff even when they retaliate. We theoretically and numerically show that ARS would not only lead to the induction of a no-attack state among mining pools, but also achieve the adaptive balance between retaliation and selfishness.
AB - Currently, miners typically join mining pools to solve cryptographic puzzles together, and mining pools are in high competition. This has led to the development of several attack strategies such as block withholding (BWH) and fork after withholding (FAW) attacks that can weaken the health of PoW systems and but maximize mining pools’ profits. In this paper, we present strategies called Adaptive Retaliation Strategies (ARS) to mitigate not only BWH attacks but also FAW attacks. In ARS, each pool cooperates with other pools in the normal situation, and adaptively executes either FAW or BWH attacks for the purpose of retaliation only when attacked. In addition, in order for rational pools to adopt ARS, ARS should strike to an adaptive balance between retaliation and selfishness because the pools consider their payoff even when they retaliate. We theoretically and numerically show that ARS would not only lead to the induction of a no-attack state among mining pools, but also achieve the adaptive balance between retaliation and selfishness.
KW - Bitcoin
KW - Block Withholding Attack
KW - Fork After Withholding Attack
KW - Mining
KW - Repeated Game
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85074775397
U2 - 10.1145/3318041.3355472
DO - 10.1145/3318041.3355472
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85074775397
T3 - AFT 2019 - Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies
SP - 169
EP - 182
BT - AFT 2019 - Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies
PB - Association for Computing Machinery, Inc
Y2 - 21 October 2019 through 23 October 2019
ER -