跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2610.40558 · v1

Power Adjusting Games Under Block-Dependent Pool Payout Schemes

首次提交 2026-10-30 01:40
版本更新 2026-10-30 01:40
雷达观测 2026-10-30 13:28
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Advanced power adjusting block withholding attacks such as PAW and T-PAW have been analyzed so far under a global-reset version of the proportional scheme (GRP), which is rarely used in practice. In this paper, we analyze T-PAW, which contains FAW and PAW as special cases, under the block-dependent payout schemes deployed in practice: Pay-Per-Last-N-Shares (PPLNS), round-based Proportional (PROP) and exponential-decay (EXP). We derive the revenue ratios analytically, by renewal arguments for PPLNS and through the stationary carry process of an open round for PROP and EXP. We further introduce Power Adjusting Hopping (PAH), where an adversary of any size adjusts its power allocation towards the pool according to the blockwork age of the round without withholding any block, and derive its revenue ratios under PROP and EXP. We show that GRP misestimates the T-PAW gain in a scheme-dependent direction: it overstates the gain under PROP up to an order of magnitude and understates it under EXP for the original slush decay rate. PROP is highly vulnerable to PAH, while EXP faces a trade-off: a slow decay invites PAH and a fast decay invites T-PAW. PPLNS is the least vulnerable scheme: it is immune to PAH and it mitigates, but does not eliminate, T-PAW. All analytical results are verified by Monte Carlo simulations.

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

该论文在 PPLNS、PROP 和 EXP 等实际部署的区块依赖支付方案下,分析 T-PAW 与 PAH 两类算力调整攻击的收益比,并指出 GRP 会误估这些攻击的收益。

正在读取账号与研究记录…

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-10-30 01:40 · 最新观测版本

Power Adjusting Games Under Block-Dependent Pool Payout Schemes

Advanced power adjusting block withholding attacks such as PAW and T-PAW have been analyzed so far under a global-reset version of the proportional scheme (GRP), which is rarely used in practice. In this paper, we analyze T-PAW, which contains FAW and PAW as special cases, under the block-dependent payout schemes deployed in practice: Pay-Per-Last-N-Shares (PPLNS), round-based Proportional (PROP) and exponential-decay (EXP). We derive the revenue ratios analytically, by renewal arguments for PPLNS and through the stationary carry process of an open round for PROP and EXP. We further introduce Power Adjusting Hopping (PAH), where an adversary of any size adjusts its power allocation towards the pool according to the blockwork age of the round without withholding any block, and derive its revenue ratios under PROP and EXP. We show that GRP misestimates the T-PAW gain in a scheme-dependent direction: it overstates the gain under PROP up to an order of magnitude and understates it under EXP for the original slush decay rate. PROP is highly vulnerable to PAH, while EXP faces a trade-off: a slow decay invites PAH and a fast decay invites T-PAW. PPLNS is the least vulnerable scheme: it is immune to PAH and it mitigates, but does not eliminate, T-PAW. All analytical results are verified by Monte Carlo simulations.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗