Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hierarchical Byzantine fault-tolerance protocol for permissioned blockchain systems

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Emerging blockchain technology has introduced a new challenge to the distributed system research: Can Byzantine fault-tolerance protocols scale up to, for example, hundreds of nodes? In this work, we introduce HiBFT, a hierarchical Byzantine fault-tolerance protocol to address the problem. The core idea is to divide replicas into groups and exchange consensus messages among groups, thus avoiding the necessity of message broadcasting. The motivation for such approach bases on the hierarchical property of network architecture in permissioned block chains, our target deployments. HiBFT works very much in the same way as the classical Practical Byzantine Fault-Tolerance protocol. However, it replaces the concept of physical replica with a logical one that represents a replica group. As such, protocol message complexity can be reduced from \(O(N^2)\) to \(O(s^2)\) where N and s are the total number of replicas and the number of groups. Additionally, using threshold signature scheme for representing a logical group results in two important improvements: The cost of signature verification is significantly reduced at each replica; blocks can be secured more effectively in terms of signature size. Our protocol guarantees safety and liveness under partially synchronous assumption with a correctness proof. Our experiment results show that the protocol can scale up to hundred of nodes.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abd-El-Malek M, Ganger GR, Goodson GR, Reiter MK, Wylie JJ (2005) Fault-scalable Byzantine fault-tolerant services. ACM SIGOPS Oper Syst Rev 39:59–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Amir Y, Danilov C, Dolev D, Kirsch J, Lane J, Nita-Rotaru C, Olsen J, Zage D (2010) Steward: Scaling Byzantine fault-tolerant replication to wide area networks. IEEE Trans Dependable Secure Comput 7(1):80–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Androulaki E, Barger A, Bortnikov V, Cachin C, Christidis K, De Caro A, Enyeart D, Ferris C, Laventman G, Manevich, Y et al (2018) Hyperledger fabric: a distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. In: Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference. ACM, p 30

  4. Baker J, Bond C, Corbett JC, Furman JJ, Khorlin A, Larson J, Leon J-M, Li Y, Lloyd A, Yushprakh V (2011) Megastore: Providing scalable, highly available storage for interactive services. In: Proceedings of the Conference on Innovative Data system Research (CIDR), pp 223–234

  5. Behl J, Distler T, Kapitza R (2017) Hybrids on steroids: SGX-based high performance BFT. In: Proceedings of the Twelfth European Conference on Computer Systems, pp 222–237. ACM

  6. Ben-Or M (1983) Another advantage of free choice (extended abstract): Completely asynchronous agreement protocols. In: Proceedings of the second annual ACM symposium on principles of distributed computing. ACM, pp 27–30

  7. Bracha G (1984) An asynchronous [(n-1)/3]-resilient consensus protocol. In: Proceedings of the third annual ACM symposium on Principles of distributed computing. ACM, pp 154–162

  8. Buchman E (2016) Tendermint: Byzantine fault tolerance in the age of blockchains. Ph.D. thesis

  9. Burrows M (2006) The chubby lock service for loosely-coupled distributed systems. In: Proceedings of the 7th symposium on operating systems design and implementation. USENIX Association, pp 335–350

  10. Cachin C, Kursawe K, Shoup V (2005) Random oracles in constantinople: practical asynchronous byzantine agreement using cryptography. J Cryptol 18(3):219–246

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  11. Castro M, Liskov B et al (1999) Practical Byzantine fault tolerance. OSDI 99:173–186

    Google Scholar 

  12. Chun B-G, Maniatis P, Shenker S, Kubiatowicz J (2007) Attested append-only memory: making adversaries stick to their word. ACM SIGOPS Oper Syst Rev 41:189–204

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Corbett JC, Dean J, Epstein M, Fikes A, Frost C, Furman JJ, Ghemawat S, Gubarev A, Heiser C, Hochschild P et al (2013) Spanner: Google’s globally distributed database. ACM Trans Computer Syst (TOCS) 31(3):8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Correia M, Ferreira Neves N, Lung LC, Veríssimo P (2005) Low complexity Byzantine-resilient consensus. Distrib Comput 17(3):237–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cowling J, Myers D, Liskov B, Rodrigues R, Shrira L (2006) HQ replication: a hybrid quorum protocol for Byzantine fault tolerance. In: Proceedings of the 7th symposium on Operating systems design and implementation. USENIX Association, pp 177–190

  16. Duan S, Peisert S, Levitt KN (2014) hbft:speculative byzantine fault tolerance with minimum cost. IEEE Trans Dependable Secure Comput 12(1):58–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dwork C, Lynch N, Stockmeyer L (1988) Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony. J ACM (JACM) 35(2):288–323

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Ethereum Foundation. Go ethreum (2018). https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum. Accessed 15 Oct 2018

  19. Fischer MJ, Lynch NA, Paterson MS (1985) Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J ACM (JACM) 32(2):374–382

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Hunt P, Konar M, Junqueira FP, Reed B (2010) Zookeeper: Wait-free coordination for internet-scale systems. In USENIX Annual Technical Conference, vol 8. Boston, MA, USA, p 9

  21. Johnson D, Menezes A, Vanstone S (2001) The elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA). Int J Inf Secur 1(1):36–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kotla R, Alvisi L, Dahlin M, Clement A, Wong E (2007) Zyzzyva: speculative Byzantine fault tolerance. ACM SIGOPS Oper Syst Rev 41:45–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lamport L (1998) The part-time parliament. ACM Trans Comput Syst (TOCS) 16(2):133–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lamport L et al (2001) Paxos made simple. ACM Sigact News 32(4):18–25

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lamport L, Shostak R, Pease M (1982) The Byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans Program Lang Syst (TOPLAS) 4(3):382–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Levin D, Douceur JR, Lorch JR, Moscibroda T (2009) TrInc: Small trusted hardware for large distributed systems. NSDI 9:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  27. Malkhi D, Reiter M (1998) Byzantine quorum systems. Distrib Comput 11(4):203–213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mao Y, Junqueira FP, Marzullo K (2008) Mencius: building efficient replicated state machines for WANs. In: Proceedings of OSDI’08, USENIX Conference on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, USENIX, pp 369–384

  29. Miller A, Xia Y, Croman K, Shi E, Song D (2016) The honey badger of BFT protocols. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. ACM, pp 31–42

  30. Nakamoto S (2008) Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Technical report

  31. Oki BM, Liskov BH (1988) Viewstamped replication: a new primary copy method to support highly-available distributed systems. In: Proceedings of the seventh annual ACM symposium on principles of distributed computing. ACM, pp 8–17

  32. Ongaro D, Ousterhout JK (2014) In search of an understandable consensus algorithm. In: USENIX Annual Technical Conference, pp 305–319

  33. Rabin MO (1983) Randomized Byzantine generals. In: 24th annual symposium on foundations of computer science (SFCS 1983). IEEE, pp 403–409

  34. Schneider FB (1990) Implementing fault-tolerant services using the state machine approach: a tutorial. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 22(4):299–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Shamir A (1979) How to share a secret. Commun ACM 22(11):612–613

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Shoup V (2000) Practical threshold signatures. In: Advances in cryptology—EUROCRYPT 2000. Springer, pp 207–220

  37. Tschorsch F, Scheuermann B (2016) Bitcoin and beyond: a technical survey on decentralized digital currencies. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor 18(3):2084–2123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Underwood S (2016) Blockchain beyond bitcoin. Commun ACM 59(11):15–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Veronese GS, Correia M, Bessani AN, Lung LC 2009) Spin one’s wheels? byzantine fault tolerance with a spinning primary. In: 2009 28th IEEE International Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems. IEEE, pp 135–144

  40. Veronese GS, Correia M, Bessani AN, Lung LC (2010) EBAWA: efficient byzantine agreement for wide-area networks. In: 2010 IEEE 12th international symposium on high assurance systems engineering. IEEE, pp 10–19

  41. Veronese GS, Correia M, Bessani AN, Lung LC, Verissimo P (2013) Efficient byzantine fault-tolerance. IEEE Trans Comput 62(1):16–30

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  42. Vukolić M (2015) The quest for scalable blockchain fabric: Proof-of-work vs. BFT replication. In: International Workshop on Open Problems in Network Security. Springer, pp 112–125

  43. Vukolić M (2017) Rethinking permissioned blockchains. In: Proceedings of the ACM Workshop on Blockchain, Cryptocurrencies and Contracts. ACM, pp 3–7

  44. Wood G (2014) ETHEREUM: a secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger, Technical Report. http://gavwood.com/Paper.pdf

  45. Yin J, Martin J-P, Venkataramani A, Alvisi L, Dahlin M (2003) Separating agreement from execution for byzantine fault tolerant services. ACM SIGOPS Oper Syst Rev 37(5):253–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the ICT R&D program of MSICT/IITP. [2017-0-00045, Hyper-connected Intelligent Infrastructure Technology Development]

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, 218 Gajeong-ro, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 34129, South Korea

    Quang Tung Thai, Jong-Chul Yim, Tae-Whan Yoo, Hyun-Kyung Yoo, Ji-Young Kwak & Sun-Me Kim

Authors
  1. Quang Tung Thai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jong-Chul Yim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tae-Whan Yoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hyun-Kyung Yoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ji-Young Kwak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sun-Me Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Quang Tung Thai.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Thai, Q.T., Yim, JC., Yoo, TW. et al. Hierarchical Byzantine fault-tolerance protocol for permissioned blockchain systems. J Supercomput 75, 7337–7365 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-019-02939-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-019-02939-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation