Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

What Can Be Implemented Anonymously?

  • Conference paper
Distributed Computing (DISC 2005)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 3724))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 688 Accesses

Abstract

The vast majority of papers on distributed computing assume that processes are assigned unique identifiers before computation begins. But is this assumption necessary? What if processes do not have unique identifiers or do not wish to divulge them for reasons of privacy? We consider asynchronous shared-memory systems that are anonymous. The shared memory contains only the most common type of shared objects, read/write registers. We investigate, for the first time, what can be implemented deterministically in this model when processes can fail. We give anonymous algorithms for some fundamental problems: timestamping, snapshots and consensus. Our solutions to the first two are wait-free and the third is obstruction-free. We also show that a shared object has an obstruction-free implementation if and only if it satisfies a simple property called idempotence. To prove the sufficiency of this condition, we give a universal construction that implements any idempotent object.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Afek, Y., Attiya, H., Dolev, D., Gafni, E., Merritt, M., Shavit, N.: Atomic snapshots of shared memory. J. ACM 40(4), 873–890 (1993)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, J.H.: Composite registers. Distributed Computing 6(3), 141–154 (1993)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Angluin, D.: Local and global properties in networks of processors. In: 12th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pp. 82–93 (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Angluin, D., Aspnes, J., Diamadi, Z., Fischer, M.J., Peralta, R.: Computation in networks of passively mobile finite-state sensors. In: 23rd ACM Symp. on PODC, pp. 290–299 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Aspnes, J., Fich, F., Ruppert, E.: Relationships between broadcast and shared memory in reliable anonymous distributed systems. In: Distributed Computing, 18th Intl. Symp., pp. 260–274 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Aspnes, J., Herlihy, M.: Wait-free data structures in the asynchronous PRAM model. In: 2nd ACM SPAA, pp. 340–349 (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Aspnes, J., Shah, G., Shah, J.: Wait-free consensus with infinite arrivals. In: 34th ACM Symp. on Theory of Computing, pp. 524–533 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Attiya, H., Gorbach, A., Moran, S.: Computing in totally anonymous asynchronous shared memory systems. Inf. and Computation 173(2), 162–183 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Bazzi, R.A., Ding, Y.: Non-skipping timestamps for byzantine data storage systems. In: Distributed Computing, 18th Intl. Conf., pp. 405–419 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Berthold, O., Federrath, H., Köhntopp, M.: Project anonymity and unobservability in the internet. In: 10th Conf. on Computers, Freedom and Privacy, pp. 57–65 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Bono, S.C., Soghoian, C.A., Monrose, F.: Mantis: A lightweight, server-anonymity preserving, searchable P2P network. Technical Report TR-2004-01-B-ISI-JHU, Information Security Institute, Johns Hopkins University (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Buhrman, H., Panconesi, A., Silvestri, R., Vitanyi, P.: On the importance of having an identity or, is consensus really universal? In: Herlihy, M.P. (ed.) DISC 2000. LNCS, vol. 1914, pp. 134–148. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Chandra, T.D.: Polylog randomized wait-free consensus. In: 15th ACM Symp. on PODC, pp. 166–175 (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Drulă, C.: The totally anonymous shared memory model in which the number of proces ses is known. Personal communication

    Google Scholar 

  15. Eğecioğlu, O., Singh, A.K.: Naming symmetric processes using shared variables. Distributed Computing 8(1), 19–38 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Goldschlag, D., Reed, M., Syverson, P.: Onion routing. Commun. ACM 42(2), 39–41 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Guerraoui, R., Ruppert, E.: What can be implmented anonymously? Technical Report 200496, School of Computer and Communications Sciences, EPFL (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Herlihy, M.: Wait-free synchronization. ACM TOPLAS 13(1), 124–149 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Herlihy, M., Luchangco, V., Moir, M.: Obstruction-free synchronization: Double-ended queues as an example. In: 23rd IEEE Intl Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 522–529 (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Herlihy, M., Shavit, N.: The topological structure of asynchronous computability. J. ACM 46(6), 858–923 (1999)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  21. Herlihy, M.P., Wing, J.M.: Linearizability: A correctness condition for concurrent objects. ACM TOPLAS 12(3), 463–492 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Jayanti, P., Toueg, S.: Wakeup under read/write atomicity. In: van Leeuwen, J., Santoro, N. (eds.) WDAG 1990. LNCS, vol. 486, pp. 277–288. Springer, Heidelberg (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Johnson, R.E., Schneider, F.B.: Symmetry and similarity in distributed systems. In: 4th ACM Symp. on PODC, pp. 13–22 (1985)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Kutten, S., Ostrovsky, R., Patt-Shamir, B.: The Las-Vegas processor identity problem (How and when to be unique). J. Algs 37(2), 468–494 (2000)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Lipton, R.J., Park, A.: The processor identity problem. Inf. Process. Lett. 36(2), 91–94 (1990)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Loui, M.C., Abu-Amara, H.H.: Memory requirements for agreement among unreliable asynchronous processes. In: Preparata, F.P. (ed.) Advances in Computing Research, vol. 4, pp. 163–183. JAI Press, Greenwich (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Neiger, G.: Set-linearizability. In: 13th ACM Symp. on PODC, p. 396 (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  28. Panconesi, A., Papatriantafilou, M., Tsigas, P., Vitányi, P.: Randomized naming using wait-free shared variables. Distributed Computing 11(3), 113–124 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Reiter, M.K., Rubin, A.D.: Crowds: Anonymity for web transactions. ACM Trans. on Inf. and System Security 1(1), 66–92 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Teng, S.-H.: Space efficient processor identity protocol. Inf. Process. Lett. 34(3), 147–154 (1990)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. EPFL, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Rachid Guerraoui

  2. York University, Toronto, Canada

    Eric Ruppert

Authors
  1. Rachid Guerraoui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Eric Ruppert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS and University Paris Diderot,  

    Pierre Fraigniaud

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2005 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Guerraoui, R., Ruppert, E. (2005). What Can Be Implemented Anonymously?. In: Fraigniaud, P. (eds) Distributed Computing. DISC 2005. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 3724. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11561927_19

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11561927_19

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-29163-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-32075-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics