Abstract
Payment channels allow a sender to do multiple transactions with a receiver without recording each single transaction on-chain. While most of the current constructions for payment channels focus on UTXO-based cryptocurrencies with reduced scripting capabilities (e.g., Bitcoin or Monero), little attention has been given to the possible benefits of adapting such constructions to cryptocurrencies based on the account model and offering a Turing complete language (e.g., Ethereum).
The focus of this work is to implement efficient payment channels tailored to the capabilities of account-based cryptocurrencies with Turing-complete language support in order to provide scalable payments that are interoperable across different cryptocurrencies and unlinkable for third-parties (e.g., payment intermediaries). More concretely, we continue the line of research on cryptocurrency universal payment channels (\(\textsf{UPC}\)) which facilitate interoperable payment channel transactions across different ledgers in a hub-and-spoke model, by offering greater scalability than point-to-point architectures. Our design proposes two different versions, \(\textsf{UPC}\) and \(\textsf{AUPC}\). For \(\textsf{UPC}\) we formally describe the protocol ideas sketched in previous work and evaluate our proof-of-concept implementation. Then, \(\textsf{AUPC}\) further extends the concept of universal payment channels by payment unlinkability against the intermediary server.
We also point the reader to the full version of our paper [28].
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
Notes
- 1.
For ease of notation we have considered that the each instance of the \(\textsf{UPC}\) contract is between the Hub and a single party, however, it can easily be extended to consider all the parties within a single blockchain to use the same contract.
- 2.
MATIC is the native token used in the Polygon blockchain.
- 3.
Notably they employ a separate SecretRegistry contract [27] to ensure that worst case delays are independent of the length of the payment route.
- 4.
As noted in [4], this is to avoid the risk of not being able to unlock the transfers, as the gas cost for this operation grows linearly with the number of the pending locks and thus the number of pending transfers.
- 5.
The limit, currently set to 160, is a rounded value that ensures the gas cost of unlocking will be less than 40% of Ethereum’s traditional pi-million (3141592) block gas limit.
- 6.
References
Bolt #2: peer protocol for channel management. https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/blob/master/02-peer-protocol.md#rationale-7. Accessed 22 Sept 2020
Payment channels - bitcoin wiki. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Payment_channels. Accessed 05 May 2021
Raiden. https://raiden.network/. Accessed 04 May 2021
Raiden. https://raiden-network-specification.readthedocs.io/en/latest/mediated_transfer.html#limit-to-number-of-simultaneously-pending-transfers. Accessed 04 May 2021
Aumayr, L., et al.: Generalized bitcoin-compatible channels. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2020/476 (2020)
Baldimtsi, F., et al.: Accumulators with applications to anonymity-preserving revocation. In: IEEE EuroS&P (2017)
Ben-Sasson, E., et al.: Zerocash: decentralized anonymous payments from bitcoin. In: 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, pp. 459–474. IEEE Computer Society Press (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/SP.2014.36
Bentov, I., Kumaresan, R.: How to use bitcoin to design fair protocols. In: Garay, J.A., Gennaro, R. (eds.) CRYPTO 2014. LNCS, vol. 8617, pp. 421–439. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44381-1_24
Chatzigiannis, P., Baldimtsi, F., Chalkias, K.: SoK: auditability and accountability in distributed payment systems. In: Sako, K., Tippenhauer, N.O. (eds.) ACNS 2021. LNCS, vol. 12727, pp. 311–337. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-78375-4_13
Christodorescu, M., et al.: Universal payment channels: an interoperability platform for digital currencies. CoRR abs/2109.12194 (2021). https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.12194
Decker, C., Wattenhofer, R.: A fast and scalable payment network with bitcoin duplex micropayment channels. In: Pelc, A., Schwarzmann, A.A. (eds.) SSS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9212, pp. 3–18. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21741-3_1
Dziembowski, S., Eckey, L., Faust, S., Malinowski, D.: Perun: virtual payment hubs over cryptocurrencies. In: 2019 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pp. 106–123. IEEE (2019)
Heilman, E., Lipmann, S., Goldberg, S.: Atomic swaps. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Atomic_swap. Accessed 04 May 2021
Heilman, E., Lipmann, S., Goldberg, S.: The Arwen trading protocols. In: Bonneau, J., Heninger, N. (eds.) FC 2020. LNCS, vol. 12059, pp. 156–173. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51280-4_10
Glaeser, N., Maffei, M., Malavolta, G., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Tairi, E., Thyagarajan, S.A.: Foundations of coin mixing services. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2022/942 (2022). https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/942
Green, M., Miers, I.: Bolt: anonymous payment channels for decentralized currencies. In: Proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 473–489. ACM (2017)
Gudgeon, L., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Roos, S., McCorry, P., Gervais, A.: SoK: layer-two blockchain protocols. In: Bonneau, J., Heninger, N. (eds.) FC 2020. LNCS, vol. 12059, pp. 201–226. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-51280-4_12
Heilman, E., Alshenibr, L., Baldimtsi, F., Scafuro, A., Goldberg, S.: TumbleBit: an untrusted bitcoin-compatible anonymous payment hub. In: NDSS 2017. The Internet Society (2017)
Chainalysis Inc.: Chainalysis: blockchain analysis. https://www.chainalysis.com/
Khalil, R., Zamyatin, A., Felley, G., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Gervais, A.: Commit-chains: Secure, scalable off-chain payments. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2018/642 (2018). https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/642
Le, D.V., Hurtado, L.T., Ahmad, A., Minaei, M., Lee, B., Kate, A.: A tale of two trees: one writes, and other reads: optimized oblivious accesses to bitcoin and other UTXO-based blockchains. Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol. 2020(2), 519–536 (2020). https://doi.org/10.2478/popets-2020-0039. https://par.nsf.gov/biblio/10200542
Lind, J., Eyal, I., Pietzuch, P.R., Sirer, E.G.: Teechan: payment channels using trusted execution environments (2016). http://arxiv.org/abs/1612.07766
Lind, J., Naor, O., Eyal, I., Kelbert, F., Sirer, E.G., Pietzuch, P.: Teechain: a secure payment network with asynchronous blockchain access. In: Proceedings of the 27th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pp. 63–79. SOSP 2019, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA (2019). https://doi.org/10.1145/3341301.3359627
Malavolta, G., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Kate, A., Maffei, M., Ravi, S.: Concurrency and privacy with payment-channel networks. In: Thuraisingham, B.M., Evans, D., Malkin, T., Xu, D. (eds.) ACM CCS 2017. pp. 455–471. ACM Press (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3133956.3134096
Malavolta, G., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Schneidewind, C., Kate, A., Maffei, M.: Anonymous multi-hop locks for blockchain scalability and interoperability. In: NDSS 2019. The Internet Society (2019)
Meiklejohn, S., et al.: A fistful of bitcoins: characterizing payments among men with no names. Commun. ACM (2016)
Miller, A., Bentov, I., Bakshi, S., Kumaresan, R., McCorry, P.: Sprites and state channels: payment networks that go faster than lightning. In: Goldberg, I., Moore, T. (eds.) FC 2019. LNCS, vol. 11598, pp. 508–526. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32101-7_30
Minaei, M., et al.: Unlinkability and interoperability in account-based universal payment channels. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2023/916 (2023). https://eprint.iacr.org/2023/916
Minaei Bidgoli, M., Kumaresan, R., Zamani, M., Gaddam, S.: System and method for managing data in a database (2023). https://patents.google.com/patent/US11556909B2/
Mizrahi, A., Zohar, A.: Congestion attacks in payment channel networks. https://arxiv.org/pdf/2002.06564.pdf. Accessed 04 May 2021
Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system (2009). http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
Poon, J., Dryja, T.: The bitcoin lightning network: scalable off-chain instant payments. http://lightning.network/lightning-network-paper.pdf. Accessed 22 Sept 2020
Kumaresan, R., Vaikuntanathan, V., Vasudevan, P. N.: Improvements to secure computation with penalties. In: CCS, pp. 406–417 (2016)
Ron, D., Shamir, A.: Quantitative analysis of the full bitcoin transaction graph. In: Sadeghi, A.-R. (ed.) FC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7859, pp. 6–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39884-1_2
Tairi, E., Moreno-Sanchez, P., Maffei, M.: A\({}^{\text{2}}\)l: anonymous atomic locks for scalability in payment channel hubs. In: 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP 2021, San Francisco, CA, USA, 24–27 May 2021, pp. 1834–1851. IEEE (2021). https://doi.org/10.1109/SP40001.2021.00111
Van Saberhagen, N.: Cryptonote v 2.0 (2013). https://cryptonote.org/whitepaper.pdf
Zamyatin, A., Harz, D., Lind, J., Panayiotou, P., Gervais, A., Knottenbelt, W.: XCLAIM: trustless, interoperable, cryptocurrency-backed assets. In: IEEE Security and Privacy. IEEE (2019)
Acknowledgements
This work has been partially supported by Madrid regional government as part of the program S2018/TCS-4339 (BLOQUES-CM) co-funded by EIE Funds of the European Union; by grant IJC2020-043391-I/MCIN/AEI/10.13039/501100011033; by PRODIGY Project (TED2021-132464B-I00) funded by MCIN/AEI/10.13039/ 501100011033/ and the European Union NextGenerationEU/PRTR.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Ethics declarations
Disclaimers
Case studies, comparisons, statistics, research and recommendations are provided “AS IS” and intended for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon for operational, marketing, legal, technical, tax, financial or other advice. Visa Inc. neither makes any warranty or representation as to the completeness or accuracy of the information within this document, nor assumes any liability or responsibility that may result from reliance on such information. The Information contained herein is not intended as investment or legal advice, and readers are encouraged to seek the advice of a competent professional where such advice is required. These materials and best practice recommendations are provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon for marketing, legal, regulatory or other advice. Recommended marketing materials should be independently evaluated in light of your specific business needs and any applicable laws and regulations. Visa is not responsible for your use of the marketing materials, best practice recommendations, or other information, including errors of any kind, contained in this document. All trademarks are the property of their respective owners, are used for identification purposes only, and do not necessarily imply product endorsement or affiliation with Visa.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2024 International Financial Cryptography Association
About this paper
Cite this paper
Minaei, M. et al. (2024). Unlinkability and Interoperability in Account-Based Universal Payment Channels. In: Essex, A., et al. Financial Cryptography and Data Security. FC 2023 International Workshops. FC 2023. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 13953. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48806-1_24
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48806-1_24
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-48805-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-48806-1
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)