Majority is not Needed: A Counterstrategy to Selfish Mining

Authors: Jonathan Gal, Maytal B Szabo

License: CC BY-SA 4.0

Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2304.06313v1

  • Comprehensive Summary
  • Key points
  • Layman's Summary
  • Blog article
The paper "Majority is not Needed: A Counterstrategy to Selfish Mining" explores the issue of selfish mining attacks in the context of Bitcoin. Previous research on this topic assumed that all miners who are not part of a selfish pool will continue to mine honestly, but in reality, this is not always incentivized, especially when other pools employ deviant strategies like selfish mining. The authors investigate a scenario where a large enough pool capitalizes on another selfish pool to gain 100% of the profit and commit double spending attacks. They propose a counterstrategy called "Equal-Forking," which can be used by honest miners to counter any deviant strategy and discourage other pools from implementing such strategies. The paper presents three concrete contributions: first, it introduces a new model for analyzing deviant mining strategies; second, it proposes an effective counterstrategy called "Equal-Forking"; third, it shows that even the possibility of Equal-Forking discourages other pools from implementing deviant strategies. The authors also discuss related work on deviant mining and highlight the limitations of existing solutions. Overall, this paper provides important insights into the problem of selfish mining in Bitcoin and proposes an effective solution that can help maintain the integrity of the blockchain system.
AI-generated keywords: Selfish Mining

AI-generated Key Points

  • The paper explores the issue of selfish mining attacks in Bitcoin
  • Previous research assumed honest miners will continue to mine honestly, but this is not always incentivized
  • A scenario is investigated where a large enough pool capitalizes on another selfish pool to gain 100% of the profit and commit double spending attacks
  • A counterstrategy called "Equal-Forking" is proposed to discourage deviant strategies and maintain blockchain integrity
  • Three contributions are presented: a new model for analyzing deviant mining strategies, an effective counterstrategy called "Equal-Forking," and evidence that even the possibility of Equal-Forking discourages other pools from implementing deviant strategies
  • Related work on deviant mining is discussed, and limitations of existing solutions are highlighted.
Also access our AI generated: Comprehensive summary, Lay summary, Blog-like article; or ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant.

Abstract: In the last few years several papers investigated selfish mine attacks, most of which assumed that every miner that is not part of the selfish mine pool will continue to mine honestly. However, in reality, remaining honest is not always incentivized, particularly when another pool is employing selfish mining or other deviant strategies. In this work we explore the scenario in which a large enough pool capitalises on another selfish pool to gain 100\% of the profit and commit double spending attacks. We show that this counterstrategy can effectively counter any deviant strategy, and that even the possibility of it discourages other pools from implementing deviant strategies.

Submitted to arXiv on 13 Apr. 2023

Tools for this paper

Explain it differently 3 free rewrites left today
Export BibTeX · RIS (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote) · Markdown (Notion, Obsidian) · Premium
Citation alerts Premium
Journal club Slides to present it Premium
For journalists Press kit and hype check Premium

Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant

You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.

Figures and plots

Ask about a figure by number or use its question button to request visual analysis. Up to two figures and four image panels per question. Values read from plots are approximate; check the original data.

AI assistant instructions?

Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting

Score: 0

Why do we need votes?

Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.

The previous summary was created more than a year ago and can be re-run (if necessary) by clicking on the Run button below.

Similar papers summarized with our AI tools

Navigate through even more similar papers through a

tree representation

Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.