In addition to limiting the adversary via a communication model synchrony, asynchrony, or partial synchrony, we need a way to limit the adversary’s power to corrupt parties. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. – John Dalberg-Acton 1887 As John observed almost 150 years ago, if the adversary’s...| decentralizedthoughts.github.io
In this post we introduce a key building block in the Byzantine Model called Binding Crusader Agreement. We show how to use it in the next post. This is a simplified version extracted from our paper. In the three previous posts we (1) defined the problem and discussed the FLP...| decentralizedthoughts.github.io
We continue to explore the marvelous world of consensus in the Asynchronous model. In this post, we present Ben-Or’s classic protocol from 1983. In the next post, we will present a more modern version that is a simplified version from our paper. In the previous post we defined the problem...| decentralizedthoughts.github.io
In this series of posts, we explore what can be done in the Asynchronous model. This model seems challenging because the adversary can delay messages by any bounded time. By the end of this series, you will see that almost everything that can be done in synchrony can be obtained...| decentralizedthoughts.github.io
In this series of posts, we explore the marvelous world of consensus in the Asynchronous model. In this third post, we present a modern version of Ben-Or’s classic protocol that is part of our new work on Asynchronous Agreement. In the first post we defined the problem and in the...| decentralizedthoughts.github.io
What is the simplest setting where randomization can help solve consensus? Assume lock-step (synchrony) with $f<n$ crash failures. We know that in the worst case reaching agreement takes at least $f+1$ rounds. This lower bound holds even if the protocol is randomized so the natural question is: Can randomization help...| decentralizedthoughts.github.io