TY - GEN
T1 - EPIC
T2 - 50th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, DSN 2020
AU - Liu, Chao
AU - Duan, Sisi
AU - Zhang, Haibin
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 IEEE.
PY - 2020/6
Y1 - 2020/6
N2 - Asynchronous BFT protocols such as HoneyBadgerBFT and BEAT are inherently robust against timing, performance, and denial-of-service attacks. The protocols, however, achieve static security, where the adversary needs to choose the set of corrupted replicas before the execution of the protocol. The situation is in contrast to that of most of existing BFT protocols (e.g., PBFT) which achieve adaptive security, where the adversary can choose to corrupt replicas at any moment during the execution of the protocol. We present EPIC, a novel and efficient asynchronous BFT protocol with adaptive security. Via a five-continent deployment on Amazon EC2, we show that EPIC is slightly slower for small and medium-sized networks than the most efficient asynchronous BFT protocols with static security. We also find as the number of replicas is smaller than 46, EPIC's throughput is stable, achieving peak throughput of 8,000 - 12,500 tx/sec using t2.medium VMs. When the network size grows larger, EPIC is not as efficient as those with static security, with throughput of 4,000 - 6,300 tx/sec.
AB - Asynchronous BFT protocols such as HoneyBadgerBFT and BEAT are inherently robust against timing, performance, and denial-of-service attacks. The protocols, however, achieve static security, where the adversary needs to choose the set of corrupted replicas before the execution of the protocol. The situation is in contrast to that of most of existing BFT protocols (e.g., PBFT) which achieve adaptive security, where the adversary can choose to corrupt replicas at any moment during the execution of the protocol. We present EPIC, a novel and efficient asynchronous BFT protocol with adaptive security. Via a five-continent deployment on Amazon EC2, we show that EPIC is slightly slower for small and medium-sized networks than the most efficient asynchronous BFT protocols with static security. We also find as the number of replicas is smaller than 46, EPIC's throughput is stable, achieving peak throughput of 8,000 - 12,500 tx/sec using t2.medium VMs. When the network size grows larger, EPIC is not as efficient as those with static security, with throughput of 4,000 - 6,300 tx/sec.
KW - Byzantine fault tolerance
KW - adaptive security
KW - adaptively secure BFT
KW - asynchronous BFT
KW - threshold cryptography
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090401873&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1109/DSN48063.2020.00058
DO - 10.1109/DSN48063.2020.00058
M3 - Conference contribution
AN - SCOPUS:85090401873
T3 - Proceedings - 50th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, DSN 2020
SP - 437
EP - 451
BT - Proceedings - 50th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, DSN 2020
PB - Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.
Y2 - 29 June 2020 through 2 July 2020
ER -