Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogias’s research while affiliated with University of Edinburgh and other places

What is this page?


This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.

Publications (14)


Brick: Asynchronous Incentive-Compatible Payment Channels
  • Chapter

October 2021

·

15 Reads

·

21 Citations

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Zeta Avarikioti

·

Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogias

·

Roger Wattenhofer

·

Dionysis Zindros

Off-chain protocols (channels) are a promising solution to the scalability and privacy challenges of blockchain payments. Current proposals, however, require synchrony assumptions to preserve the safety of a channel, leaking to an adversary the exact amount of time needed to control the network for a successful attack. In this paper, we introduce Brick, the first payment channel that remains secure under network asynchrony and concurrently provides correct incentives. The core idea is to incorporate the conflict resolution process within the channel by introducing a rational committee of external parties, called wardens. Hence, if a party wants to close a channel unilaterally, it can only get the committee’s approval for the last valid state. Additionally, Brick provides sub-second latency because it does not employ heavy-weight consensus. Instead, Brick uses consistent broadcast to announce updates and close the channel, a light-weight abstraction that is powerful enough to preserve safety and liveness to any rational parties. We formally define and prove for Brick the properties a payment channel construction should fulfill. We also design incentives for Brick such that honest and rational behavior aligns. Finally, we provide a reference implementation of the smart contracts in Solidity.


SoK: Communication Across Distributed Ledgers

October 2021

·

103 Reads

·

151 Citations

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

·

Mustafa Al-Bassam

·

Dionysis Zindros

·

[...]

·

William J. Knottenbelt

Since the inception of Bitcoin, a plethora of distributed ledgers differing in design and purpose has been created. While by design, blockchains provide no means to securely communicate with external systems, numerous attempts towards trustless cross-chain communication have been proposed over the years. Today, cross-chain communication (CCC) plays a fundamental role in cryptocurrency exchanges, scalability efforts via sharding, extension of existing systems through sidechains, and bootstrapping of new blockchains. Unfortunately, existing proposals are designed ad-hoc for specific use-cases, making it hard to gain confidence in their correctness and composability. We provide the first systematic exposition of cross-chain communication protocols. We formalize the underlying research problem and show that CCC is impossible without a trusted third party, contrary to common beliefs in the blockchain community. With this result in mind, we develop a framework to design new and evaluate existing CCC protocols, focusing on the inherent trust assumptions thereof, and derive a classification covering the field of cross-chain communication to date. We conclude by discussing open challenges for CCC research and the implications of interoperability on the security and privacy of blockchains.



All You Need is DAG

February 2021

·

77 Reads

We present DAG-Rider, the first asynchronous Byzantine Atomic Broadcast protocol that achieves optimal resilience, optimal amortized communication complexity, and optimal time complexity. DAG-Rider is post-quantum safe and ensures that all messages proposed by correct processes eventually get decided. We construct DAG-Rider in two layers: In the first layer, processes reliably broadcast their proposals and build a structured Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) of the communication among them. In the second layer, processes locally observe their DAGs and totally order all proposals with no extra communication.


CALYPSO: private data management for decentralized ledgers

December 2020

·

59 Reads

·

28 Citations

Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment

Distributed ledgers provide high availability and integrity , making them a key enabler for practical and secure computation of distributed workloads among mutually distrustful parties. Many practical applications also require strong confidentiality , however. This work enhances permissioned and permissionless blockchains with the ability to manage confidential data without forfeiting availability or decentralization. The proposed Calypso architecture addresses two orthogonal challenges confronting modern distributed ledgers: (a) enabling the auditable management of secrets and (b) protecting distributed computations against arbitrage attacks when their results depend on the ordering and secrecy of inputs. Calypso introduces on-chain secrets, a novel abstraction that enforces atomic deposition of an auditable trace whenever users access confidential data. Calypso provides user-controlled consent management that ensures revocation atomicity and accountable anonymity. To enable permissionless deployment, we introduce an incentive scheme and provide users with the option to select their preferred trustees. We evaluated our Calypso prototype with a confidential document-sharing application and a decentralized lottery. Our benchmarks show that transaction-processing latency increases linearly in terms of security (number of trustees) and is in the range of 0.2 to 8 seconds for 16 to 128 trustees.


Divide and Scale: Formalization of Distributed Ledger Sharding Protocols

October 2019

·

139 Reads

Sharding distributed ledgers is the most promising on-chain solution for scaling blockchain technology. In this work, we define and analyze the properties a sharded distributed ledger should fulfill. More specifically we show that a sharded blockchain cannot be scalable under a fully adaptive adversary and that it can scale up to n/lognn/\log n under an epoch-adaptive adversary. This is possible only if the distributed ledger employs a checkpoint process at the end of each epoch. Our model builds upon and extends the Bitcoin backbone protocol by defining consistency and scalability. Consistency encompasses the need for atomic execution of cross-shard transactions to preserve safety, whereas scalability encapsulates the speedup a sharded system can gain in comparison to a non-sharded system. Lastly, we analyze existing sharded blockchains and either show their correctness (OmniLedger, RapidChain) under our model, or pinpoint where they fail to balance the consistency and scalability requirements (Elastico, Monoxide).


SoK: Communication Across Distributed Ledgers

October 2019

·

275 Reads

Communication across distributed systems, where each system runs its own consensus, is a problem previously studied only within a single trust domain (e.g., a datacenter). With the appearance of distributed ledgers or blockchains, numerous protocols requiring robustness against adversarial behavior have emerged. Cross-chain communication thereby plays a fundamental role in cryptocurrency exchanges, sharding, as well as the bootstrapping and migration of distributed ledgers. Unfortunately, existing proposals are designed ad-hoc for specific use-cases, making it hard to gain confidence on their correctness and to use them as building blocks for new systems. In this paper, we provide the first systematic exposition of protocols for cross-chain communication. Through formalization of the underlying research question, which reduces to the fair exchange problem, we identify threat and network model assumptions, necessary for designing correct cross-chain communication protocols. We overview main applications, derive a classification and provide a comparative analysis of existing approaches. Further, we survey and classify techniques for verifying state cross-chain and mechanisms for constructing locks.


Rethinking General-Purpose Decentralized Computing

May 2019

·

38 Reads

·

6 Citations

While showing great promise, smart contracts are difficult to program correctly, as they need a deep understanding of cryptography and distributed algorithms, and offer limited functionality, as they have to be deterministic and cannot operate on secret data. In this paper we present Protean, a general-purpose decentralized computing platform that addresses these limitations by moving from a monolithic execution model, where all participating nodes store all the state and execute every computation, to a modular execution-model. Protean employs secure specialized modules, called functional units, for building decentralized applications that are currently insecure or impossible to implement with smart contracts. Each functional unit is a distributed system that provides a special-purpose functionality by exposing atomic transactions to the smart-contract developer. Combining these transactions into arbitrarily-defined workflows, developers can build a larger class of decentralized applications, such as provably-secure and fair lotteries or e-voting.


Channels: Horizontal Scaling and Confidentiality on Permissioned Blockchains: 23rd European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, ESORICS 2018, Barcelona, Spain, September 3-7, 2018, Proceedings, Part I

August 2018

·

153 Reads

·

63 Citations

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

Sharding, or partitioning the system’s state so that different subsets of participants handle it, is a proven approach to building distributed systems whose total capacity scales horizontally with the number of participants. Many distributed ledgers have adopted this approach to increase their performance, however, they focus on the permissionless setting that assumes the existence of a strong adversary. In this paper, we deploy channels for permissioned blockchains. Our first contribution is to adapt sharding on asset-management applications for the permissioned setting, while preserving liveness and safety even on transactions spanning across-channels. Our second contribution is to leverage channels as a confidentiality boundary, enabling different organizations and consortia to preserve their privacy within their channels and still be part of a bigger collaborative ecosystem. To make our system concrete we map it on top of Hyperledger Fabric.


Figure 1: Architectural overview of CHAINIAC 
Figure 2: A deterministic skipchain S 3 2 
Figure 3: Trust delegation in CHAINIAC 
Figure 4: Constructing an aggregate layer in CHAINIAC 
Figure 5: Reproducible build latency for Debian packages 
CHAINIAC: Proactive Software-Update Transparency via Collectively Signed Skipchains and Verified Builds
  • Conference Paper
  • Full-text available

August 2018

·

378 Reads

·

104 Citations

Software-update mechanisms are critical to the security of modern systems, but their typically centralized design presents a lucrative and frequently attacked target. In this work, we propose CHAINIAC, a decentralized software-update framework that eliminates single points of failure , enforces transparency, and provides efficient verifi-ability of integrity and authenticity for software-release processes. Independent witness servers collectively verify conformance of software updates to release policies, build verifiers validate the source-to-binary correspondence , and a tamper-proof release log stores collectively signed updates, thus ensuring that no release is accepted by clients before being widely disclosed and validated. The release log embodies a skipchain, a novel data structure , enabling arbitrarily out-of-date clients to efficiently validate updates and signing keys. Evaluation of our CHAINIAC prototype on reproducible Debian packages shows that the automated update process takes the average of 5 minutes per release for individual packages, and only 20 seconds for the aggregate timeline. We further evaluate the framework using real-world data from the PyPI package repository and show that it offers clients security comparable to verifying every single update themselves while consuming only one-fifth of the bandwidth and having a minimal computational overhead.

Download

Citations (11)


... We compare Stingray with the consensus-less fast path of Sui [30], called Mysticeti-FPC [5] as to our knowledge, Sui is the only blockchain supporting consensus-less transactions. We did not compare with other consensus-less systems, including FastPay [10], Astro [21], Zef [11], and Brick [4] because they only support payments and are thus not adapted to showcase loads under high concurrency 5 . Furthermore, these systems lack a mechanism to unlock transactions and thus cannot optimistically handle contention. ...

Reference:

Stingray: Fast Concurrent Transactions Without Consensus
Brick: Asynchronous Incentive-Compatible Payment Channels
  • Citing Chapter
  • October 2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

... The security of the bridging process lies in guaranteeing that C t cannot be unlocked unless the equivalent amount of C s has been locked previously and vice versa [13]. This requires a robust locking mechanism on both blockchain systems, as well as a reliable mechanism to validate information on each of the blockchains that comes from the other system. ...

SoK: Communication Across Distributed Ledgers
  • Citing Chapter
  • October 2021

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

... Front-running was generally defined by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) as an action performed based upon nonpublic information in order to profit when these predictions come true (Helmy, 2021). Since the mempool is public by default, gaining an advantage in a blockchain system may require only observing and reacting faster than competitors instead of assuming a privileged position (Helmy, 2021;Zhang H et al., 2022;Li et al., 2022;Baum et al., 2021;Kokoris-Kogias et al., 2021;Blackshear et al., 2021). ...

CALYPSO: private data management for decentralized ledgers
  • Citing Article
  • December 2020

Proceedings of the VLDB Endowment

... Conversely, FL might have different capabilities and quality among devices in the network, since the participants are geographically separated. Both can produce a more extensive class of decentralised applications that are provably-secure and scalable (Alp et al., 2019). Eventually, for the ease of presentation and implementation, we use the decentralised computation concepts to be adopted in the training model. ...

Rethinking General-Purpose Decentralized Computing
  • Citing Conference Paper
  • May 2019

... Most previous sharding protocols, instead, adopt another cross-shard execution approach -the two-phase commit approach. The two-phase commit approach is driven by a coordinator (e.g., a client [2], [86] or a shard [3], [6], [25], [47], [87]) consisting of two phases: (i) voting phase where the coordinator sends the divided intra-shard transactions to all relevant shards to execute and lock involved states, and (ii) committing phase where the coordinator collects the vote results and informs all relevant shards either commit (if all vote for commit) or abort (if otherwise) the transaction. When states are locked by a crossshard transaction during the voting phase, any other intrashard or cross-shard transactions cannot access the locked states and will be blocked from being executed until the crossshard transaction finishes its committing phase and releases the locks. ...

Channels: Horizontal Scaling and Confidentiality on Permissioned Blockchains: 23rd European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, ESORICS 2018, Barcelona, Spain, September 3-7, 2018, Proceedings, Part I
  • Citing Chapter
  • August 2018

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

... Most existing sharding solutions, such as Elastico [6], Omniledger [7], Rapidchain [8], and Pyramid [9], primarily focus on permissionless blockchains. However, permissioned blockchains like Hyperledger Fabric [10], which are widely used in enterprise settings, also require effective sharding solutions to meet the growing demand for scalable and efficient blockchain applications. ...

OmniLedger: A Secure, Scale-Out, Decentralized Ledger via Sharding

... However, in-toto may be a tool of choice to communicate malware scanning results across different Linux distributions as we discussed in Section 6. Other systems such as Contour [44] and CHAINIAC [45] may also be viable alternatives for this goal. ...

CHAINIAC: Proactive Software-Update Transparency via Collectively Signed Skipchains and Verified Builds

... Sybil Attacks(Swathi et al., 2019) To mitigate Sybil attacks in blockchain networks, several security mechanisms can be implemented. These include identity verification, consensus mechanisms like PoW and PoS, reputation systems, Sybil detection algorithms, social graph analysis, and decentralized governance(Zhang et al., 2014;Borge et al., 2017;Swathi et al., 2019;Biryukov & Feher, 2020;Aggarwal & Kumar, 2021). Some important security mechanisms are explained hereunder:(*) Identity Validation: Identity validation, including personhood validation in P2P networks, is a crucial measure to mitigate Sybil attacks. ...

Proof-of-Personhood: Redemocratizing Permissionless Cryptocurrencies

... It receives data transmitted from the network layer and utilizes these data to provide necessary services or operations. The perception layer, also referred to as the sensor layer, is implemented as the bottom layer in the IIoT architecture [8]. It interacts with physical devices and components through smart devices such as RFID tags, sensors, and actuators. ...

TRM-SIoT: A scalable hybrid trust & reputation model for the social Internet of Things