quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity

A methodology and application for quantifying the security of cryptocurrency consensus protocols. (by fresheneesz)

Stats

Basic quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity repo stats
7
1
0.2
about 1 month ago

fresheneesz/quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity is an open source project licensed under MIT License which is an OSI approved license.

quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity Alternatives

Similar projects and alternatives to quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity

  • GitHub repo lnbook

    Mastering the Lightning Network (LN) (by seresistvanandras)

  • GitHub repo lnbook

    Mastering the Lightning Network (LN)

  • GitHub repo bitcoinThroughputAnalysis

    Analysis of Bitcoin's current and future transaction throughput bottlenecks.

NOTE: The number of mentions on this list indicates mentions on common posts. Hence, a higher number means a better quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity alternative or higher similarity.

Posts

Posts where quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity has been mentioned. We have used some of these posts to build our list of alternatives and similar projects - the last one was on 2021-04-30.
  • PoW vs PoS. Help me
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-04-30
    Look, I agree that proof of stake can work and I also think it can be more secure than PoW. But just wanting to upgrade it does not make it possible. There are a lot of technical and security issues that can't just be wished away. I've done the technical thinking to be confident that PoS can work, but the vast majority of people who tout PoS have not. So please realize that its not that simple.
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-04-30
    You might be interested in reading my (unfinished) paper: https://github.com/fresheneesz/quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity
  • What is stopping Bitcoin from being replaced by a competitor with better underlying tech?
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-04-03
    So to my last point, if an altcoin does come up with something like that and the technical bitcoin community agrees that technology is sound, Bitcoin can incorporate it. However, there are fundamental barriers to higher base-layer transaction speeds, and most coins that offer higher speeds do so because they sacrifice security and resilience against attack. Something that consumes less security is basically going to be some kind of proof of stake. There is massive opposition in the bitcoin community against proof of stake, however if its shown that a proof of stake consensus protocol fulfils all of Bitcoin's the security goals, its possible for bitcoin to be transitioned to a different consensus protocol. I believe that proof of stake has fundamental properties that make it not only less costly but also more secure. However, it will take a lot of time to convince the community, and likely will take running into the limits of bitcoin's current consensus protocol in a much worse way before people take PoS more seriously for bitcoin. Bitcoin's consensus protocol works fine for now and there are a lot of other higher priorities to focus on at the moment.
  • Q: Difference between proof of work / proof of stake. Can someone explain both principles in a non-abstract way?
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-03-29
    That is also not at all true. I assume you mean that there is zero net incentive to mess with anything, because there sure is massive incentive to double spend if a miner could. A double spending attack could extract billions of dollars from the economy if done properly. This is certainly a large inecentive to cheat. However, bitcoin's proof of work is secure enough at this point to make the capital requirements of doing such an attack enormous - in the tens of billions of dollars. However, if an attacker or group of attakers is willing to put tens of billions of dollars to work, its certainl plausible that they could make a solid profit.
  • Why proof of stake will not work (in the short term) or why Bitcoin understands and caters to Human Nature
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-03-28
    I have indeed done my own research and have come to the conclusion that proof of work provides substantially less security than proof of stake can. You can see my incomplete research here: https://github.com/fresheneesz/quantificationOfConsensusProtocolSecurity
  • What Will Happen to Bitcoin After All 21 Million are Mined?
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-02-15
    This I agree with. However, it feels quite unlikely in the current environment that Bitcoin could switch to proof of stake anytime soon. There is so much negative sentiment about proof of stake in the bitcoin community. However, after doing an analysis of the security of proof of work and proof of stake and writing not one, but two consensus protocols, I'm convinced that proof of stake can be not only cheaper in terms of resources expended (and therefore fees expended) but also far more secure.
  • [AMA] I'm nopara73, co-founder of Wasabi Wallet and wrote for 51% of its code base.. Ask Me Anything
    reddit.com/r/Bitcoin | 2021-01-12
    I very much agree with measuring privacy and security based on cost of attack. That is the metric I chose to use for quantifying the security of various consensus protocols as well.