Abstract
In blockchain technology, consensus protocols serve as mechanisms to reach agreements among a distributed network of nodes. Using a centralized party or consortium, private blockchains achieve high transaction throughput and scalability, Hyperledger Sawtooth is a prominent example of private blockchains that uses Proof of Elapsed Time (PoET) (SGX-based) to achieve consensus. In this paper, we propose a novel protocol, called Proof of Queue (PoQ), for private (permissioned) blockchains, that combines the lottery strategy of PoET with a specialized round-robin algorithm where each node has an equal chance to become a leader (who propose valid data blocks to the chain) with equal access. PoQ is relatively scalable without any collision. Similar to PoET, our protocol uses Intel SGX, a Trusted Execution Environment, to generate a secure random waiting time to choose a leader, and fairly distribute the leadership role to everyone on the network. PoQ scales fairness linearly with SGX machines: the more the SGX in the network, the higher the number of chances to be selected as a leader per unit time. Our analysis and experiments show that PoQ provides significant performance improvements over PoET.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
Intel, “Software sealing policies– intel® software guard extensions developer guide,” 2017. [Online]. Available: https://software.intel.com/en-us/documentation/sgx-developer-guide.
- 4.
Max Memory Bandwidth is the maximum rate at which data can be read from or stored into a semiconductor memory by the processor (in GB/s).
References
Ahmed, M., Kostiainen, K.: Identity aging: efficient blockchain consensus (2018)
Andreina, S., Bohli, J.M., Karame, G.O., Li, W., Marson, G.A.: PoTS - a secure proof of TEE-stake for permissionless blockchains. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2018, 1135 (2018)
Androulaki, E., et al.: Hyperledger fabric: a distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference, pp. 1–15 (2018)
Bano, S., et al.: SoK: consensus in the age of blockchains. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies, pp. 183–198 (2019)
Bashar, G.D., Hill, G., Singha, S., Marella, P.B., Dagher, G.G., Xiao, J.: Contextualizing consensus protocols in blockchain: a short survey. In: 2019 First IEEE International Conference on Trust, Privacy and Security in Intelligent Systems and Applications (TPS-ISA), pp. 190–195 (2019)
Bentov, I., Lee, C., Mizrahi, A., Rosenfeld, M.: Proof of activity: extending bitcoin’s proof of work via proof of stake [extended abstract] y. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform. Eval. Rev. 42(3), 34–37 (2014)
Buterin, V., et al.: Ethereum: a next-generation smart contract and decentralized application platform, p. 7 (2014)
Chen, L., Xu, L., Shah, N., Gao, Z., Lu, Y., Shi, W.: On security analysis of proof-of-elapsed-time (PoET). In: Spirakis, P., Tsigas, P. (eds.) SSS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10616, pp. 282–297. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69084-1_19
Chen, X., Zhao, S.: Scalable, efficient, and consistent consensus for blockchains (2018)
Costan, V., Devadas, S.: Intel SGX explained. IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive 2016(086), 1–118 (2016)
Dang, H., Dinh, A., Chang, E.C., Ooi, B.C.: Chain of trust: can trusted hardware help scaling blockchains? arXiv preprint arXiv:1804.00399 (2018)
Dang, H., Dinh, T.T.A., Loghin, D., Chang, E.C., Lin, Q., Ooi, B.C.: Towards scaling blockchain systems via sharding. In: Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Management of Data, SIGMOD 2019, pp. 123–140. ACM, New York (2019)
Dhillon, V., Metcalf, D., Hooper, M.: The hyperledger project. In: Blockchain Enabled Applications, pp. 139–149. Springer, Berkeley (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-3081-7_10
Dib, O., Brousmiche, K.L., Durand, A., Thea, E., Hamida, E.B.: Consortium blockchains: overview, applications and challenges. Int. J. Adv. Telecommun. 11(1&2) (2018)
Dziembowski, S., Faust, S., Kolmogorov, V., Pietrzak, K.: Proofs of space. In: Gennaro, R., Robshaw, M. (eds.) CRYPTO 2015. LNCS, vol. 9216, pp. 585–605. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48000-7_29
Johnson, S., Scarlata, V., Rozas, C., Brickell, E., Mckeen, F.: Intel® software guard extensions: EPID provisioning and attestation services. White Paper 1, 1–10 (2016)
Kiayias, A., Russell, A., David, B., Oliynykov, R.: Ouroboros: a provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In: Katz, J., Shacham, H. (eds.) CRYPTO 2017. LNCS, vol. 10401, pp. 357–388. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63688-7_12
Milutinovic, M., He, W., Wu, H., Kanwal, M.: Proof of luck: an efficient blockchain consensus protocol. In: Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on System Software for Trusted Execution, SysTEX 2016. ACM (2016)
Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system (2008)
Schwartz, D., Youngs, N., Britto, A., et al.: The ripple protocol consensus algorithm. White Paper 5(8), Ripple Labs Inc. (2014)
Wahab, A., Mehmood, W.: Survey of consensus protocols (2018)
Xiao, Y., Zhang, N., Lou, W., Hou, Y.T.: A survey of distributed consensus protocols for blockchain networks (2019)
Zhang, F., Eyal, I., Escriva, R., Juels, A., Renesse, R.V.: REM: resource-efficient mining for blockchains. In: 26th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 2017). USENIX Association, Vancouver (2017)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
A Appendix
A Appendix
Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript (Table 3):
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 ICST Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering
About this paper
Cite this paper
Bashar, G.D., Avila, A.A., Dagher, G.G. (2020). PoQ: A Consensus Protocol for Private Blockchains Using Intel SGX. In: Park, N., Sun, K., Foresti, S., Butler, K., Saxena, N. (eds) Security and Privacy in Communication Networks. SecureComm 2020. Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, vol 336. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63095-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63095-9_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-63094-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-63095-9
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)