SRM INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Delhi-NCR Campus, Modinagar , Ghaziabad (U.P.)
ASSIGNMENT– 3
BBA Ist Year(IInd Semester)
SUBJECT NAME: EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES AND APPLICATION
SUBJECT CODE: UBA24SE1L
Submitted To:
Submitted By:
Sunny Gupta Name- Madhur Chaudhary
Department Of Business Administration Reg No- RA2451001030072
SRM-IST, Delhi-NCR Campus
Consensus
Mechanisms
A fault tolerate
mechanisms that is used
to achieve the
necessary agreement on
a single data value or a
single state of the
network among
distributed process or
multi-agent systems.
➢ Uses scarce resources i.e., electricity to
perform a fairy lottery for block creation and
chain selection.
➢ Probability of receiving block reward is roughly
proportional to work performed / energy
burnt.
Proof ➢ Performs:
Chain distribution
of
➢
➢ Who produces blocks
work ➢
➢
When blocks are produced
Not a mathematical solution, but a game
theoretical mechanisms that leverages
monetary and other incentives to keep people
honest.
➢ Bitcoin would not work if coins did jot have a
financial value
➢ Examples: Bitcoin, most cryptocurrencies.
Proof of stakes
Staked amount is locked away and cannot be accessed for a time period , and can be forfeit if the
created block is invalid.
Probability of receiving minting fee is proportional to the amount staked .
Pros
Less electricity usage
Stronger alignment of incentives
Cons
Naive POS only addresses chain selection
The rich are getting richer
Risk of loss of funds
BFT-based
Tendermint , Ethermint
Chain-based
Ethereum Casper, NXT, Peer Coin, Decred, Dash, NEO, Stratis, Lisk, PIVX.
DELEGATED PROOF OF STAKES
Nodes vote for witness (top 100 are paid , top 20 earn a regular salary), nodes can withdraw
their vote in case of improper conduct by a witness.
Relies upon a group of delegates to validated blocks on behalf of all nodes in the network.
Pros: Scalable, energy efficient, cheap transaction.
Cons: partially centralized.
Examples: Bitshares, EOS, Steemit.
Generate a random target address; it is
infeasible to find the private key for a
given public address.
Spend existing coins to this
Proof unspendable address as “proof of
burn”. The tokens cannot never be
of recovered.
Selected block mining probability
burn proportional to burnt coins, or use
“proof of burn” to bootstrap/ seed new
coins.
Examples: Slim coin, Counterparty (for
seeding).
Proof of authority
Stakes social capital, rather than financial capital.
By identifying validators, POA consensus becomes inherently centralized. Therefore, it’s best
suited for private blockchains and consortiums.
Validators should be scarce, so there is a desire to hold the title.
Nodes “stake their reputation”.
Inherently centralized.
Examples: parity/ kovan, Rinkeby, VeChain.
Proof
of
importance
Proof of importance recognizes that other factors (than staked amount and
coin hold time) can be taken into account when determining what nodes
provide the most value to a network.
Key factors:
Net transfer, or total spent in the last 30 days.
Vested amount of currency to create blocks.
Nodes that are clustered, aka more intermingled, are more heavily weighted.
Examples: XEM.
Nothing at stake
Staker can stake on all candidate chains; and
will be seen as having staked on whichever
chain ultimate ”wins”.
This can in principle be detected, but changing
stakes is necessary for convergence. Explicit
multiple staking rounds address this to some
degree.
Stake does not add to the convergence of the
Attacks on proof system; In contrast for PoW energy is a real-
world finite resources.
of stakes
Long Range Attack
Attacker could buy a key to an address that is
now empty but had a large token balance in
the past, and generate alternative history from
that point.
Solution: checkpointing Problem :
checkpointing introduces centralized /”ask a
friend” security model.
Thank you