arXiv subjects

Christian Cachin

Publications and source records attributed to Christian Cachin.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

Track me if you can: Ephemeral coin tracing

Privacy-preserving payment systems are well understood, yet their adoption in regulated settings, such as central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), institutional stablecoins, and other compliant payment infrastructures, has been limited by concerns over their potential misuse for illicit activities. Regulators counter financial crime with a toolbox of complementary measures to identify, trace, and stop criminal actors. Tracing is one key tool: acting on outside evidence that a user is implicated in a crime such as money laundering, law enforcement follows the suspect's funds through the ledger to uncover laundering routes and accomplices. The tracing schemes proposed in the literature, however, grant authorities unbounded capabilities: once initiated, tracing propagates through the transaction graph or persists across all future transactions of a user, and may eventually deanonymize the entire ledger. Only the goodwill of the authority, or the honesty of a committee, keeps surveillance targeted and temporary. We introduce ephemeral coin tracing (ECT), a primitive whose tracing capacity is bounded by construction, both in the number of simultaneously traced users and in the number of hops each trace survives. The authority issues tracing tags that degrade at each hop; after a protocol-defined number of hops, a tag collapses into a value indistinguishable from that of an untagged coin. Within a tracing period the bound is absolute: no authority, however motivated, can follow a tag past its budget. We formalize ECT, define its security and privacy guarantees, and give two constructions, one over exponential ElGamal and one over Damg{\aa}rd--Jurik encryption.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

The Consensus Number of Untraceable Cryptocurrencies

Sender untraceability hides the account spent by a cryptocurrency transfer among a set of candidates, its masking set. What a transfer does to that set separates two designs: classical schemes retain the whole set and append a nullifier marking the spent account, so the ledger grows with every transfer; constant-state schemes instead consume and replace the entire set. We ask how this choice affects synchronization. We formalize the two designs as the linear and constant untraceable asset transfer objects (LUAT and CUAT) and locate them in the consensus hierarchy. In LUAT, transfers from distinct accounts commute. Its consensus number is 2, compared with 1 for standard asset transfer, independently of the masking-set size and of the untraceability notion, and LUAT is starvation-free. Partitioning the accounts into fixed masking sets lets exhausted sets be garbage-collected without increasing that number. In CUAT, a transfer consumes and replaces every account of its masking set, so two transfers whose sets intersect cannot both take effect. We formalize this with the conflict graph on masking sets, whose edges join sets sharing an account. Under weak untraceability, which protects a transaction in isolation, the consensus number is unbounded already for one-round protocols. Under strong untraceability, which protects against an observer of the complete history, untraceability holds on a history exactly when any two accounts sharing a masking set occur in the same number of the masking sets in it. This uniform incidence bounds the conflict graph, and matching constructions attain it, so the consensus number is determined exactly and grows quadratically in the masking-set size. Finally, CUAT is not starvation-free. The two objects therefore pay for the same privacy differently: LUAT in storage, CUAT in synchronization and fairness.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Symmetry all the way down

Asymmetric trust generalizes classical symmetric quorum systems by allowing each process to specify its own failure assumptions. While this flexibility enables tolerance of strictly more failure scenarios, it is not known if, in these cases, it is actually possible to solve distributed tasks, and if so, which. We answer this question using the depth hierarchy for asymmetric trust (Amores-Sesar et al., OPODIS~'25), which characterizes how much a process must rely on others to solve a task. We prove that asymmetric trust does not increase the solvability of tasks requiring depth two or more, such as reliable broadcast or consensus. Specifically, for any Byzantine asymmetric quorum system, every failure scenario that permits solving a task requiring depth at least two can also be tolerated by a suitably constructed Byzantine symmetric quorum system. We show this via a compiler that transforms asymmetric quorum systems into symmetric ones. The additional failure patterns tolerated exclusively by asymmetric trust correspond to scenarios in which only simpler tasks requiring depth one or less (such as consistent broadcast) can be solved. We further prove that this result is tight in the depth hierarchy, meaning that there exist no compilers that produce symmetric quorum systems that are valid also in failure scenarios where correct processes have depths one or less. Our results clarify the precise power of asymmetric trust. While it strictly enlarges the set of tolerable failure patterns, it does not provide additional strength for solving tasks requiring depth two or higher.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2026

Crypto x AI, AI x Crypto: A Survey

The intersection of crypto x AI is spawning papers, products, online posts, and companies. All the surrounding buzz, though, obscures what exactly has been done, what the opportunities and challenges are, and what open questions deserve attention. This survey paper asks what AI can do for blockchain-based technologies (broadly construed as "crypto") (crypto x AI), and vice versa (AI x crypto). We systematize existing work, summarize key takeaways, highlight open research questions, and offer a perspective on pervasive industry misconceptions, concluding that AI and crypto are still in the very early stages of meaningful integration.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2026

Monotone Erasure Codes

Erasure codes are a critical component in reliable storage systems today, and many blockchain systems use consensus protocols that involve erasure codes to reduce their communication cost. Existing erasure codes rely on a threshold failure assumption, but recent blockchain systems have departed from this simple model and use generalized failure assumptions. This paper introduces monotone erasure codes that respect arbitrary trust assumptions on a set of nodes. The paper first describes a method for constructing a monotone erasure code from any access structure given by a monotone Boolean formula. Next, the relevant notion of a linear monotone erasure code is introduced, which works on vectors over a finite field and where the encoding is a linear operation. We then focus on constructing linear monotone erasure codes: We give an efficient algorithm to construct linear monotone erasure codes for any access structure, and we show how to efficiently construct linear monotone erasure codes for the special case of partitioned access structures with minimal storage overhead. Last but not least, this work also shows how to use monotone erasure codes to obtain a communication-efficient, generalized version of the well-known asynchronous verifiable information dispersal (AVID) primitive, which is a key building block for developing efficient reliable broadcast and consensus protocols.

cs.IT↗

arXiv2026

Simplicial Belief

Recently, much work has been carried out to study simplicial interpretations of modal logic. While notions of (distributed) knowledge have been well investigated in this context, it has been open how to model belief in simplicial models. We introduce polychromatic simplicial complexes, which naturally impose a plausibility relation on states. From this, we can define various notions of belief.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2025

A Lightweight Approach for State Machine Replication

We present a lightweight solution for state machine replication with commitment certificates. Specifically, we adapt and analyze a median rule for the stabilizing consensus problem [Doerr11] to operate in a client-server setting where arbitrary servers may be blocked adaptively based on past system information. We further extend our protocol by compressing information about committed commands, thus keeping the protocol lightweight, while still enabling clients to easily prove that their commands have indeed been committed on the shared state. Our approach guarantees liveness as long as at most a constant fraction of servers are blocked, ensures safety under any number of blocked servers, and supports fast recovery even after all servers are blocked. In addition to offering near-optimal asymptotic performance in several respects, our method is fully decentralized, unlike other near-optimal solutions that rely on leaders. In particular, our solution is robust against adversaries that target key servers (which captures insider-based denial-of-service attacks), whereas leader-based approaches fail under such a blocking model.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

Asymmetric Grid Quorum Systems for Heterogeneous Processes

Quorum systems are a common way to formalize failure assumptions in distributed systems. Traditionally, these assumptions are shared by all involved processes. More recently, systems have emerged which allow processes some freedom in choosing their own, subjective or asymmetric, failure assumptions. For such a system to work, individual processes' assumptions must be compatible. However, this leads to a Catch-22-style scenario: How can processes collaborate to agree on compatible failure assumptions when they have no compatible failure assumptions to start with? We introduce asymmetric grid quorum systems that allow a group of processes to specify heterogeneous trust assumptions independently of each other and without coordination. They are based on qualitative attributes describing how the processes differ. Each process may select a quorum system from this class that aligns best with its subjective view. The available choices are designed to be compatible by definition, thereby breaking the cycling dependency. Asymmetric grid quorum systems have many applications that range from cloud platforms to blockchain networks.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

Weaker Assumptions for Asymmetric Trust

In distributed systems with asymmetric trust, each participant is free to make its own trust assumptions about others, captured by an asymmetric quorum system. This contrasts with ordinary, symmetric quorum systems and threshold models, where trust assumptions are uniformly shared among participants. Fundamental problems like reliable broadcast and consensus are unsolvable in the asymmetric model if quorum systems satisfy only the classical properties of consistency and availability. Existing approaches overcome this by introducing stronger assumptions. We show that some of these assumptions are overly restrictive, so much so that they effectively eliminate the benefits of asymmetric trust. To address this, we propose a new approach to characterize asymmetric problems and, building upon it, present algorithms for reliable broadcast and consensus that require weaker assumptions than previous solutions. Our methods are general and can be extended to other core problems in systems with asymmetric trust.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

DAG-based Consensus with Asymmetric Trust [Extended Version]

In protocols with asymmetric trust, each participant is free to make its own individual trust assumptions about others, captured by an asymmetric quorum system. This contrasts with ordinary, symmetric quorum systems and with threshold models, where all participants share the same trust assumption. It is already known how to realize reliable broadcasts, shared-memory emulations, and binary consensus with asymmetric quorums. In this work, we introduce Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG)-based consensus protocols with asymmetric trust. To achieve this, we extend the key building-blocks of the well-known DAG-Rider protocol to the asymmetric model. Counter to expectation, we find that replacing threshold quorums with their asymmetric counterparts in the existing constant-round gather protocol does not result in a sound asymmetric gather primitive. This implies that asymmetric DAG-based consensus protocols, specifically those based on the existence of common-core primitives, need new ideas in an asymmetric-trust model. Consequently, we introduce the first asymmetric protocol for computing a common core, equivalent to that in the threshold model. This leads to the first randomized asynchronous DAG-based consensus protocol with asymmetric quorums. It decides within an expected constant number of rounds after an input has been submitted, where the constant depends on the quorum system.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2025

Practical Secure Aggregation by Combining Cryptography and Trusted Execution Environments

Secure aggregation enables a group of mutually distrustful parties, each holding private inputs, to collaboratively compute an aggregate value while preserving the privacy of their individual inputs. However, a major challenge in adopting secure aggregation approaches for practical applications is the significant computational overhead of the underlying cryptographic protocols, e.g. fully homomorphic encryption. This overhead makes secure aggregation protocols impractical, especially for large datasets. In contrast, hardware-based security techniques such as trusted execution environments (TEEs) enable computation at near-native speeds, making them a promising alternative for reducing the computational burden typically associated with purely cryptographic techniques. Yet, in many scenarios, parties may opt for either cryptographic or hardware-based security mechanisms, highlighting the need for hybrid approaches. In this work, we introduce several secure aggregation architectures that integrate both cryptographic and TEE-based techniques, analyzing the trade-offs between security and performance.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2025

Thetacrypt: A Distributed Service for Threshold Cryptography

Threshold cryptography is a powerful and well-known technique with many applications to systems relying on distributed trust. It has recently emerged also as a solution to challenges in blockchain: frontrunning prevention, managing wallet keys, and generating randomness. This work presents Thetacrypt, a versatile library for integrating many threshold schemes into one codebase. It offers a way to easily build distributed systems using threshold cryptography and is agnostic to their implementation language. The architecture of Thetacrypt supports diverse protocols uniformly. The library currently includes six cryptographic schemes that span ciphers, signatures, and randomness generation. The library additionally contains a flexible adapter to an underlying networking layer that provides peer-to-peer communication and a total-order broadcast channel; the latter can be implemented by distributed ledgers, for instance. Thetacrypt serves as a controlled testbed for evaluating the performance of multiple threshold-cryptographic schemes under consistent conditions, showing how the traditional micro benchmarking approach neglects the distributed nature of the protocols and its relevance when considering system performance.

cs.CR↗

arXiv2024

Asymmetric Distributed Trust

Quorum systems are a key abstraction in distributed fault-tolerant computing for capturing trust assumptions. They can be found at the core of many algorithms for implementing reliable broadcasts, shared memory, consensus and other problems. This paper introduces asymmetric Byzantine quorum systems that model subjective trust. Every process is free to choose which combinations of other processes it trusts and which ones it considers faulty. Asymmetric quorum systems strictly generalize standard Byzantine quorum systems, which have only one global trust assumption for all processes. This work also presents protocols that implement abstractions of shared memory, broadcast primitives, and a consensus protocol among processes prone to Byzantine faults and asymmetric trust. The model and protocols pave the way for realizing more elaborate algorithms with asymmetric trust.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

Synergistic Knowledge

In formal epistemology, group knowledge is often modelled as the knowledge that the group would have, if the agents shared all their individual knowledge. However, this interpretation does not account for relations between agents. In this work, we propose the notion of synergistic knowledge which makes it possible to model those relationships.

cs.LO↗

arXiv2024

Quick Order Fairness: Implementation and Evaluation

Decentralized finance revolutionizes traditional financial systems by leveraging blockchain technology to reduce trust. However, some vulnerabilities persist, notably front-running by malicious actors who exploit transaction information to gain financial advantage. Consensus with a fair order aims at preventing such attacks, and in particular, the differential order fairness property addresses this problem and connects fair ordering to the validity of consensus. The notion is implemented by the Quick Order-Fair Atomic Broadcast (QOF) protocol (Cachin et al., FC '22). This paper revisits the QOF protocol and describes a modular implementation that uses a generic consensus component. Moreover, an empirical evaluation is performed to compare the performance of QOF to a consensus protocol without fairness. Measurements show that the increased complexity comes at a cost, throughput decreases by at most 5%, and latency increases by roughly 50ms, using an emulated ideal network. This paper contributes to a comprehensive understanding of practical aspects regarding differential order fairness with the QOF protocol and also connects this with similar fairness-imposing protocols like Themis and Pompe.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2024

An Analysis of Avalanche Consensus

A family of leaderless, decentralized consensus protocols, called Snow consensus was introduced in a recent whitepaper by Yin et al. These protocols address limitations of existing consensus methods, such as those using proof-of-work or quorums, by utilizing randomization and maintaining some level of resilience against Byzantine participants. Crucially, Snow consensus underpins the Avalanche blockchain, which provides a popular cryptocurrency and a platform for running smart contracts. Snow consensus algorithms are built on a natural, randomized routine, whereby participants continuously sample subsets of others and adopt an observed majority value until consensus is achieved. Additionally, Snow consensus defines conditions based on participants' local views and security parameters. These conditions indicate when a party can confidently finalize its local value, knowing it will be adopted by honest participants. Although Snow consensus algorithms can be formulated concisely, there is a complex interaction between randomization, adversarial influence, and security parameters, which requires a formal analysis of their security and liveness. Snow protocols form the foundation for Avalanche-type blockchains, and this work aims to increase our understanding of such protocols by providing insights into their liveness and safety characteristics. First, we analyze these Snow protocols in terms of latency and security. Second, we expose a design issue where the trade-off between these two is unfavorable. Third, we propose a modification of the original protocol where this trade-off is much more favorable.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2023

Eating sandwiches: Modular and lightweight elimination of transaction reordering attacks

Traditional blockchains grant the miner of a block full control not only over which transactions but also their order. This constitutes a major flaw discovered with the introduction of decentralized finance and allows miners to perform MEV attacks. In this paper, we address the issue of sandwich attacks by providing a construction that takes as input a blockchain protocol and outputs a new blockchain protocol with the same security but in which sandwich attacks are not profitable. Furthermore, our protocol is fully decentralized with no trusted third parties or heavy cryptography primitives and carries a linear increase in latency and minimum computation overhead.

cs.DC↗

arXiv2023

We will DAG you

DAG-based protocols have been proposed as potential solutions to the latency and throughput limitations of traditional permissionless consensus protocols. However, their adoption has been hindered by security concerns and a lack of a solid foundation to guarantee improvements in both throughput and latency. In this paper, we present a construction that rigorously demonstrates how DAG-based protocols can achieve superior throughput and latency compared to chain-based consensus protocols, all while maintaining the same level of security guarantees.

cs.DC↗