Validation of the Results of Cross-chain Smart Contract Based on Confirmation Method

Read original: arXiv:2408.09962 - Published 8/20/2024 by Hong Su
Total Score

0

Validation of the Results of Cross-chain Smart Contract Based on Confirmation Method

Sign in to get full access

or

If you already have an account, we'll log you in

Overview

  • This paper presents a method for validating the results of cross-chain smart contracts based on a confirmation process.
  • The proposed approach involves collective validation, where multiple parties provide proof of contract execution for increased confidence.
  • The paper discusses the challenges of cross-chain validation and how the confirmation-based method can address them.

Plain English Explanation

In the world of blockchain and decentralized applications, smart contracts are crucial for automating and enforcing agreements between parties. However, when smart contracts need to interact with multiple blockchain networks, or "cross-chain," the process of validating the correctness of their results becomes more complex.

The researchers in this paper have developed a confirmation-based method for validating cross-chain smart contracts. The key idea is to involve multiple parties in the validation process, rather than relying on a single source. Each party provides cryptographic proof that the smart contract executed correctly, and this collective validation helps ensure the integrity of the results.

The paper explains how this approach can address the challenges of cross-chain validation, such as the need for trust in third-party oracles or the potential for discrepancies between blockchain ledgers. By requiring confirmation from multiple parties, the method helps establish a higher level of confidence in the accuracy of the smart contract's output.

Technical Explanation

The researchers propose a cross-chain validation architecture that involves several key components:

  1. Smart Contract Execution: The cross-chain smart contract is executed on one or more blockchain networks, producing a result that needs to be validated.
  2. Confirmation Providers: These are trusted parties, such as independent validators or blockchain nodes, that monitor the contract execution and provide cryptographic proof of its correctness.
  3. Confirmation Collection: The confirmation proofs from multiple providers are gathered and combined to create a collective validation of the smart contract's result.
  4. Validation Verification: The consolidated confirmation is checked to ensure that the required number of providers have attested to the validity of the smart contract's output.

The paper presents the technical details of this process, including the cryptographic mechanisms used for creating and verifying the confirmation proofs. The researchers also discuss how their approach can be applied to secure open-RAN equipment using blockchain-based solutions and ensure quality assurance for smart contracts.

Critical Analysis

The researchers acknowledge that their confirmation-based validation method relies on the availability and trustworthiness of the confirmation providers. If a significant number of providers are compromised or collude, the integrity of the validation process could be undermined. Additionally, the paper does not address the potential scalability issues that may arise as the number of cross-chain smart contracts and providers increases.

Further research could explore ways to automatically select and incentivize reliable confirmation providers, as well as investigate techniques for decentralizing the validation process even further to reduce the reliance on trusted third parties.

Conclusion

This paper presents a novel approach for validating the results of cross-chain smart contracts through a confirmation-based process. By involving multiple trusted parties in the validation, the method aims to increase the confidence in the accuracy and integrity of the smart contract's output.

The proposed architecture addresses some of the key challenges in cross-chain validation, such as the need for trust in external oracles and the potential for discrepancies between blockchain ledgers. While the method has some limitations, it represents an important step towards improving the reliability and security of cross-chain smart contract applications.



This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!

Follow @aimodelsfyi on 𝕏 →

Related Papers

Validation of the Results of Cross-chain Smart Contract Based on Confirmation Method
Total Score

0

Validation of the Results of Cross-chain Smart Contract Based on Confirmation Method

Hong Su

Smart contracts are widely utilized in cross-chain interactions, where their results are transmitted from one blockchain (the producer blockchain) to another (the consumer blockchain). Unfortunately, the consumer blockchain often accepts these results without executing the smart contracts for validation, posing potential security risks. To address this, we propose a method for validating cross-chain smart contract results. Our approach emphasizes consumer blockchain execution of cross-chain smart contracts of producer blockchain, allowing comparison of results with the transmitted ones to detect potential discrepancies and ensure data integrity during cross-chain data dissemination. Additionally, we introduce the confirmation with proof method, which involves incorporating the chain of blocks and relevant cross-chain smart contract data from the producer blockchain into the consumer blockchain as evidence (or proof), establishing a unified and secure perspective of cross-chain smart contract results. Our verification results highlight the feasibility of cross-chain validation at the smart contract level.

Read more

8/20/2024

Cross-Blockchain Communication Using Oracles With an Off-Chain Aggregation Mechanism Based on zk-SNARKs
Total Score

0

Cross-Blockchain Communication Using Oracles With an Off-Chain Aggregation Mechanism Based on zk-SNARKs

Michael Sober, Giulia Scaffino, Stefan Schulte

The closed architecture of prevailing blockchain systems renders the usage of this technology mostly infeasible for a wide range of real-world problems. Most blockchains trap users and applications in their isolated space without the possibility of cooperating or switching to other blockchains. Therefore, blockchains need additional mechanisms for seamless communication and arbitrary data exchange between each other and external systems. Unfortunately, current approaches for cross-blockchain communication are resource-intensive or require additional blockchains or tailored solutions depending on the applied consensus mechanisms of the connected blockchains. Therefore, we propose an oracle with an off-chain aggregation mechanism based on ZeroKnowledge Succinct Non-interactive Arguments of Knowledge (zk-SNARKs) to facilitate cross-blockchain communication. The oracle queries data from another blockchain and applies a rollup-like mechanism to move state and computation off-chain. The zkOracle contract only expects the transferred data, an updated state root, and proof of the correct execution of the aggregation mechanism. The proposed solution only requires constant 378 kgas to submit data on the Ethereum blockchain and is primarily independent of the underlying technology of the queried blockchains.

Read more

5/15/2024

🔎

Total Score

0

A Confirmation Rule for the Ethereum Consensus Protocol

Aditya Asgaonkar, Francesco D'Amato, Roberto Saltini, Luca Zanolini, Chenyi Zhang

A Confirmation Rule, within blockchain networks, refers to an algorithm implemented by network nodes that determines (either probabilistically or deterministically) the permanence of certain blocks on the blockchain. An example of Confirmation Rule is the Bitcoin's longest chain Confirmation Rule where a block is confirmed (with high probability) when it has a sufficiently long chain of successors, its siblings have notably shorter successor chains, and network synchrony holds. In this work, we devise a Confirmation Rule for Ethereum's consensus protocol, Gasper. Initially, our focus is on developing a rule specifically for LMD-GHOST, the component of Gasper responsible for ensuring dynamic availability. This is done independently of the influence of FFG-Casper, which is designed to finalize the blocks produced by LMD-GHOST. Subsequently, we build upon this rule to consider FFG-Casper's impact, aiming to achieve fast block confirmations through a heuristic that balances confirmation speed with a trade-off in safety guarantees. This refined Confirmation Rule could potentially standardize fast block confirmation within Gasper.

Read more

5/2/2024

Total Score

0

Bridging Trust into the Blockchain: A Systematic Review on On-Chain Identity

Awid Vaziry, Kaustabh Barman, Patrick Herbke

The ongoing regulation of blockchain-based services and applications requires the identification of users who are issuing transactions on the blockchain. This systematic review explores the current status, identifies research gaps, and outlines future research directions for establishing trusted and privacy-compliant identities on the blockchain (on-chain identity). A systematic search term was applied across various scientific databases, collecting 2232 potentially relevant research papers. These papers were narrowed down in two methodologically executed steps to 98 and finally to 13 relevant sources. The relevant articles were then systematically analyzed based on a set of screening questions. The results of the selected studies have provided insightful findings on the mechanisms of on-chain identities. On-chain identities are established using zero-knowledge proofs, public key infrastructure/certificates, and web of trust approaches. The technologies and architectures used by the authors are also highlighted. Trust has emerged as a key research gap, manifesting in two ways: firstly, a gap in how to trust the digital identity representation of a physical human; secondly, a gap in how to trust identity providers that issue identity confirmations on-chain. Potential future research avenues are suggested to help fill the current gaps in establishing trust and on-chain identities.

Read more

7/26/2024