Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
With the evolution of distributed ledger technology (DLT), several blockchains that provide enhanced privacy guarantees and features, including Corda, Hyperledger Fabric, and Canton, are being increasingly adopted. These distributed ledgers only provide partial consistency, meaning that participants can observe the same ledger differently, i.e., observe some transactions but not others, providing higher levels of privacy to the end-user.
Choosing privacy instead of transparency leads to delicate trade-offs that are difficult to manage during runtime, hampering the development of applications that depend on reasoning about shared state, e.g., asset transfers across blockchains. We propose using the concept of blockchain view (view) – an abstraction of the state a participant can access at a certain point to address this problem. Views allow us to systematically reason about either state partitions within the same DLT or an integrated view spanning across several DLTs. We introduce BUNGEE (Blockchain UNifier view GEnErator), the first DLT view generator, to allow capturing snapshots, constructing views from these snapshots, and merging views according to a set of rules specified by the view stakeholders. Creating views and operating views allows new applications built on top of dependable blockchain interoperability, such as stakeholder-centric snapshots for audits, cross-chain analysis, blockchain migration, and combined on-chain-off-chain analytics.
- [1] . 2017. The Bitcoin backbone protocol with chains of variable difficulty. In Advances in Cryptology–CRYPTO 2017, and (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 291–323. Google Scholar
- [2] . 2022. A survey on business process view integration: Past, present and future applications to blockchain. Business Process Management Journal ahead-of-print, ahead-of-print (
Jan. 2022).DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref
- [3] . 2008. Diagnosing differences between business process models. In International Conference on Business Process Management.
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library
- [4] . 2021. A security framework for distributed ledgers. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (CCS’21). Association for Computing Machinery, 1043–1064.
DOI: event-place: New York, NY, USA. Google ScholarDigital Library - [5] . 2020. Accountability in a permissioned blockchain: Formal analysis of Hyperledger Fabric. (2020).
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [6] . 2022. Do you need a distributed ledger technology interoperability solution? Distributed Ledger Technologies: Research and Practice (
Sept. 2022).DOI: Just Accepted. Google ScholarDigital Library - [7] . 2023. A brief history of blockchain interoperability. (
9 2023).DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [8] Rafael Belchior, S’ergio Guerreiro, Andr’e Vasconcelos, and Miguel Correia. 2022. A survey on business process view integration: past, present and future applications to blockchain. Business Process Management Journal 28, 3 (2022), 713–739.Google Scholar
- [9] . 2021. Towards interconnected blockchains: A comprehensive review of the role of interoperability among disparate blockchains. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 7 (
July 2021).DOI: Place: New York, NY, USA Publisher: Association for Computing Machinery. Google ScholarDigital Library - [10] 2022. FTX: An Overview of the Exchange and Its Collapse. (2022). https://www.investopedia.com/ftx-exchange-5200842Google Scholar
- [11] 2023. Centralised Exchanges are Terrible at Holding Your Money: A Timeline of Catastrophes - LocalCryptos Blog. (2023). https://blog.localcryptos.com/centralised-exchanges-are-terrible-at-holding-your-money/Google Scholar
- [12] 2022. Crypto Hack: The Mt. Gox Tragedy | CoinMarketCap. (2022). https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/article/crypto-hack-the-mt-gox-tragedyGoogle Scholar
- [13] Rafael Belchior, Andr’e Vasconcelos, S’ergio Guerreiro, and Miguel Correia. 2021. A survey on blockchain interoperability: Past, present, and future trends. ACM Comput. Surv. 54, 8 (October 2021).
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [14] Rafael Belchior, Peter Somogyvari, Jonas Pfannschmidt, André Vasconcelos, and Miguel Correia. 2023. Hephaestus: Modeling, analysis, and performance evaluation of cross-chain transactions. IEEE Transactions on Reliability (2023), 1–15.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [15] . 2022. zkBridge: Trustless Cross-chain Bridges Made Practical. (2022).
DOI: arxiv:cs/2210.00264 Google ScholarCross Ref - [16] . 2023. DendrETH: A smart contract implementation of the Ethereum light client sync protocol. (2023). https://github.com/metacraft-labs/DendrETH.
Accessed: 21-June-2023. Google Scholar - [17] . 2022. A Review of Zk-SNARKs. (2022).
DOI: arxiv:cs/2202.06877 Google ScholarCross Ref - [18] . 2019. Security and privacy of mobile wallet users in Bitcoin, Dash, Monero, and Zcash. 59 (2019), 101030.
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [19] . 2019. Toward an interoperability architecture for blockchain autonomous systems. 67, 4 (2019), 1298–1309.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [20] . 2023. Do you need a distributed ledger technology interoperability solution?Distrib. Ledger Technol. 2, 1 (2023), 37 Pages.
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [21] Rafael Belchior, Andr’e Vasconcelos, Miguel Correia, and Thomas Hardjono. 2022. Hermes: Fault-tolerant middleware for blockchain interoperability. Future Generation Computer Systems 129, (2022), 236–251.Google Scholar
- [22] . 2022. Do You Need a Distributed Ledger Technology Interoperability Solution? (2022).
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [23] . 2023. A brief history of blockchain interoperability. (
Sept. 2023).DOI: Citation Key: BelchiorBriefHistoryBlockchain2023a. Google ScholarCross Ref - [24] . 2023. The Current State of Interoperability Between Blockchain Networks. EU Blockchain Observatory Forum Note. (
Nov. 2023). https://www.eublockchainforum.eu/sites/default/files/reports/EUBOF_Interoperability%20Report-30112023.pdf[Online]. Available: https://www.eublockchainforum.eu/sites/default/files/reports/EUBOF_Interoperability%20Report-30112023.pdfGoogle Scholar - [25] . 2023. SoK: Security and privacy of blockchain interoperability. http://tinyurl.com/sok-sp-interop
Citation Key: SoKSecurityPrivacy. Google Scholar - [26] . 2022. Security and privacy challenges in blockchain interoperability - A multivocal literature review. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Evaluation and Assessment in Software Engineering 2022 (EASE’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 347–56.Google ScholarDigital Library
- [27] . 2023. A survey on privacy preservation techniques for blockchain interoperability. Journal of Systems Architecture (
Apr. 2023), 102892.DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [28] . 2018. Hyperledger Fabric: A distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference (EuroSys’18). Association for Computing Machinery.
DOI: event-place: New York, NY, USA. Google ScholarDigital Library - [29] . 2022. Private data Hyperledger-Fabricdocs master documentation. (2022). https://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/en/release-2.2/private-data/private-data.htmlGoogle Scholar
- [30] . 2021. R3’s Corda Documentation. (2021). https://docs.r3.com/Google Scholar
- [31] . 2017. Quorum White Paper. (2017). https://github.com/jpmorganchase/quorum/blob/master/docs/QuorumWhitepaperv0.2.pdfGoogle Scholar
- [32] . 2020. Iota Tangle: A cryptocurrency to communicate Internet-of-Things data. Future Generation Computer Systems 112 (
Nov. 2020), 307–319.DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [33] . 2021. Introduction to Canton Daml SDK 2.1.1 documentation. (2021). https://docs.daml.com/canton/about.htmlGoogle Scholar
- [34] . 1996. Interoperability. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 28, 1 (1996), 285–287.
Publisher: ACM New York, NY, USA. Google ScholarDigital Library - [35] . 2022. EY announces general availability of EY Blockchain Analyzer: Reconciler. (2022). https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ey-announces-general-availability-of-ey-blockchain-analyzer-reconciler-301544701.htmlGoogle Scholar
- [36] . 2021. A survey on blockchain interoperability: Past, present, and future trends. Comput. Surveys 54, 8 (
May 2021), 1–41. http://arxiv.org/abs/2005.14282Google ScholarDigital Library - [37] . 2019. Patterns for blockchain data migration. (
June 2019). http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.00239Google Scholar - [38] . SmartSync: Cross-blockchain smart contract interaction and synchronization. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC) (2022-05). 1–9.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [39] . 2022. Securing Cross-Chain Asset Transfers on Permissioned Blockchains. (
June 2022).DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [40] . 2022. Resilient Gateway-Based N-N Cross-Chain Asset Transfers. (
Nov. 2022).DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [41] . 2022. Re: [Sat]SAT entity identifiers and DIDs. (2022). https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/sat/4WOAW1JEFRBU6TQHU1PNgdob6cs/Google Scholar
- [42] . 2021. HERMES: Fault-tolerant middleware for blockchain interoperability. Future Generation Computer Systems (
March 2021).DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [43] . 2021. Verifiable observation of permissioned ledgers. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain and Cryptocurrency (ICBC). IEEE, 1–9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [44] . 2022. What is Terra LUNA - Explaining the LUNA Crash. (
May 2022). https://insidebitcoins.com/news/explaining-the-luna-crashGoogle Scholar - [45] . 2020. Hyperledger Fabric Private Data. (2020). https://hyperledger-fabric.readthedocs.io/en/release-1.4/private-data/private-data.htmlGoogle Scholar
- [46] . 2019. Inclusive deployment of blockchain for supply chains. World Economic Forum.Google Scholar
- [47] . 2019. Blockchain technology and its relationships to sustainable supply chain management. International Journal of Production Research 57, 7 (
April 2019), 2117–2135.DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [48] . 2017. A general framework for blockchain analytics. In Proceedings of the 1st Workshop on Scalable and Resilient Infrastructures for Distributed Ledgers. 1–6.Google ScholarDigital Library
- [49] . 2020. UTxO-vs account-based smart contract blockchain programming paradigms. In International Symposium on Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods. Springer, 73–88.Google Scholar
- [50] Elli Androulaki, Artem Barger, Vita Bortnikov, Christian Cachin, Konstantinos Christidis, Angelo De Caro, David Enyeart, Christopher Ferris, Gennady Laventman, Yacov Manevich, Srinivasan Muralidharan, Chet Murthy, Binh Nguyen, Manish Sethi, Gari Singh, Keith Smith, Alessandro Sorniotti, Chrysoula Stathakopoulou, Marko Vukoli.c, Sharon Weed Cocco, and Jason Yellick. 2018. Hyperledger fabric: a distributed operating system for permissioned blockchains. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth EuroSys Conference (EuroSys’18), Association for Computing Machinery, Porto, Portugal, 1–15.
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [51] . 2008. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. (2008). http://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdfGoogle Scholar
- [52] . 2018. Compact multi-signatures for smaller blockchains. In International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security. Springer, 435–464.Google ScholarDigital Library
- [53] . 2022. Hephaestus: Modelling, analysis, and performance evaluation of cross-chain transactions. (
Sep. 2022).DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [54] . 2014. IPFS-content addressed, versioned, P2P file system. arXiv preprint arXiv:1407.3561 (2014).Google Scholar
- [55] . 2018. Fraud proofs: Maximising light client security and scaling blockchains with dishonest majorities. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.09044 160 (2018).Google Scholar
- [56] . 2021. SoK: Auditability and accountability in distributed payment systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) 12727 LNCS (
June 2021), 311–337.DOI: ISBN: 9783030783747 Publisher: Springer, Cham. Google ScholarDigital Library - [57] . 2022. LedgerView: Access-control views on Hyperledger Fabric. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD’22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2218–2231.
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [58] . 2017. A blockchain-based process provenance for cloud forensics. In 2017 3rd IEEE International Conference on Computer and Communications (ICCC). IEEE, 2470–2473.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [59] . 2018. Quantum computers put blockchain security at risk. (2018).Google Scholar
- [60] . 2017. Will quantum computers be the end of public key encryption? Journal of Cyber Security Technology 1, 1 (2017), 1–22.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [61] . 2020. Towards post-quantum blockchain: A review on blockchain cryptography resistant to quantum computing attacks. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 21091–21116.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [62] . 2019. Cryptography Apocalypse: Preparing for the Day when Quantum Computing Breaks Today’s Crypto. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [63] . 2020. A zero-knowledge-proof-based digital identity management scheme in blockchain. Computers & Security 99 (
Dec. 2020), 102050.DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [64] . 2016. A quick introduction to version control with Git and GitHub. PLoS Computational Biology 12, 1 (2016), e1004668.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [65] . 2019. Hyperledger Besu Ethereum client - Hyperledger Besu. (2019). https://besu.hyperledger.org/en/stable/Google Scholar
- [66] . 2019. Ripple vs. SWIFT: Transforming cross border remittance using blockchain technology. Procedia Computer Science 147 (2019), 428–434.Google ScholarDigital Library
- [67] . 2018. Blockchain access privacy: Challenges and directions. IEEE Security & Privacy 16, 4 (2018), 38–45.Google ScholarDigital Library
- [68] . 2020. Survey: Sharding in blockchains. IEEE Access 8 (2020), 14155–14181.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [69] . 2023. A survey on privacy preservation techniques for blockchain interoperability. Journal of Systems Architecture 140 (2023), 102892.
DOI: Google ScholarDigital Library - [70] . 2021. IvyCross: A privacy-preserving and concurrency control framework for blockchain interoperability. Cryptology ePrint Archive (2021).Google Scholar
- [71] . 2016. Hawk: The blockchain model of cryptography and privacy-preserving smart contracts. In 2016 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). IEEE, 839–858.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [72] . 2022. Astraea: Anonymous and secure auditing based on private smart contracts for donation systems. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing (2022).Google Scholar
- [73] . 2020. BlockMaze: An efficient privacy-preserving account-model blockchain based on zk-SNARKs. IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing 19, 3 (2020), 1446–1463.Google ScholarCross Ref
- [74] . 2023. Harmonia: Securing Cross-Chain Applications Using Zero-Knowledge Proofs.
DOI: Citation Key: BelchiorHarmoniaSecuringCrossChain2023. Google ScholarCross Ref - [75] . 2009. View-based data integration. In Encyclopedia of Database Systems. Springer US, 3332–3339.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [76] . 2000. Logic-based techniques in data integration. In Logic-Based Artificial Intelligence. Springer US, 575–595.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [77] Gilbert Verdian, Paolo Tasca, Colin Paterson, and Gaetano Mondelli. 2018. Quant overledger whitepaper. Release V0 1, (2018), 31.Google Scholar
- [78] . 2024. Ubiquity. (2024). https://blockdaemon.com/platform/ubiquity/Google Scholar
- [79] Gavin Wood. 2016. Polkadot: Vision for a heterogeneous multi-chain framework. White Paper 21, 2327 (2016), 4662.Google Scholar
- [80] . 2021. Cross-Consensus Message Format (XCM) \(\cdot\) Polkadot Wiki. (2021). https://wiki.polkadot.network/docs/learn-crosschainGoogle Scholar
- [81] . 2019. Cosmos whitepaper. A Netw. Distrib. Ledgers (2019).Google Scholar
- [82] . 2023. Secure Asset Transfer Protocol (SATP). Number draft-ietf-satp-core-02. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-satp-core
Citation Key: HargreavesSecureAssetTransfer2023a. Google Scholar - [83] . 2019. Reengineering the audit with blockchain and smart contracts. Journal of Emerging Technologies in Accounting 16, 1 (2019), 21–35.
Publisher: American Accounting Association. Google ScholarCross Ref - [84] . 2020. Toward trustworthy blockchain-as-a-service with auditing. In ICDCS.
DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [85] . 2021. Blockchain-based cross-user data shared auditing. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540091.2021.1956879 (
July 2021), 1–21.DOI: Publisher: Taylor & Francis. Google ScholarCross Ref - [86] . 2021. Introducing Blockdaemon’s New Staking Dashboard. (
Sept. 2021). https://blockdaemon.com/blog/introducing-blockdaemons-new-staking-dashboard/Google Scholar - [87] . 2021. A Framework to Evaluate Blockchain Interoperability Solutions.
Technical Report . TechRxiv.DOI: Google ScholarCross Ref - [88] Guy Zyskind, Oz Nathan, and Alex Pentland. 2015. Enigma: Decentralized computation platform with guaranteed privacy. arXiv preprint arXiv:1506.03471. https://arxiv.org/abs/1506.03471Google Scholar
Index Terms
- BUNGEE: Dependable Blockchain Views for Interoperability
Recommendations
Blockchain-Based Confidential Payment System with Controllable Regulation
Information Security Practice and ExperienceAbstractBlockchain-based payment systems (e.g., Bitcoin) have been wildly adopted for many scenarios since the transaction details are publicly accessible. Blockchain-based anonymous payment systems (e.g., Monero and Zerocash) have also been proposed to ...
A Security Framework for Distributed Ledgers
CCS '21: Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications SecurityIn the past few years blockchains have been a major focus for security research, resulting in significant progress in the design, formalization, and analysis of blockchain protocols. However, the more general class of distributed ledgers, which includes ...
Comments