Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Fair Exchange Is Incomparable to Consensus

  • Conference paper
Theoretical Aspects of Computing - ICTAC 2008 (ICTAC 2008)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 5160))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In asynchronous systems where processes are prone to crash failures, we show that fair exchange is incomparable to distributed consensus. By incomparability we mean there exist failure detector classes that solve fair exchange and not distributed consensus, and vice versa. Remarkably, this is in contrast to the folklore belief that solving fair exchange is generally harder than solving distributed consensus.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Asokan, N.: Fairness in electronic commerce. PhD thesis, University of Waterloo, Canada (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Avoine, G., Gärtner, F., Guerraoui, R., Vukolić, M.: Gracefully degrading fair exchange with security modules. In: Dal Cin, M., Kaâniche, M., Pataricza, A. (eds.) EDCC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3463. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Avoine, G., Vaudenay, S.: Optimal fair exchange with guardian angels. In: Chae, K.-J., Yung, M. (eds.) WISA 2003. LNCS, vol. 2908. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ben-Or, M., Goldwasser, S., Wigderson, A.: Completeness theorems for non-cryptographic fault-tolerant distributed computation. In: STOC 1988, pp. 1–10. ACM Press, New York (1988)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  5. Blum, M.: Three applications of the oblivious transfer: Part I: Coin flipping by the telephone; part II: How to exchange secrets; part III: How to send certified electronic mail. Technical report, Dept. EECS, UC Berkeley (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Buttyán, L., Hubaux, J., Capkun, S.: A formal model of rational exchange and its application to the analysis of Syverson’s protocol. Journal of Computer Security 12(3-4), 551–587 (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Chadha, R., Kanovich, M., Scedrov, A.: Inductive methods and contract-signing protocols. In: CCS 2001, pp. 176–185. ACM Press, New York (2001)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  8. Chandra, T., Hadzilacos, V., Toueg, S.: The weakest failure detector for solving consensus. J. ACM 43(4), 685–722 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Chandra, T., Toueg, S.: Unreliable failure detectors for reliable distributed systems. J. ACM 43(2), 225–267 (1996)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  10. Chaum, D., Crépeau, C., Damgard, I.: Multiparty unconditionally secure protocols. In: STOC 1988, pp. 11–19. ACM Press, New York (1988)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Cortiñas, R., Freiling, F., Ghajar-Azadanlou, M., Lafuente, A., Larrea, M., Draque Penso, L., Soraluze Arriola, I.: Secure failure detection in TrustedPals. In: Masuzawa, T., Tixeuil, S. (eds.) SSS 2007. LNCS, vol. 4838. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. DeMillo, R., Lynch, N., Merritt, M.: Cryptographic protocols. In: STOC 1982, pp. 383–400. ACM Press, New York (1982)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Dolev, D., Yao, A.: On the security of public key protocols. IEEE Trans. on Information Theory IT-29(2), 198–208 (1983)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Even, S., Goldreich, O., Lempel, A.: A randomized protocol for signing contracts. Commun. ACM 28(6), 637–647 (1985)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Even, S., Yacobi, Y.: Relations among public key signature systems. Technical Report 175, Computer Science Dept., Technion, Haifa, Isreal (March 1980)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ezhilchelvan, P., Shrivastava, S.: A family of trusted third party based fair-exchange protocols. IEEE Trans. Dependable and Secure Computing 2(4) (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Fischer, M., Lynch, N., Merritt, M.: Easy impossibility proofs for distributed consensus problems. Distrib. Comput. 1(1), 26–39 (1986)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Fischer, M., Lynch, N., Paterson, M.: Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J. ACM 32(2), 374–382 (1985)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Fort, M., Freiling, F., Draque Penso, L., Benenson, Z., Kesdogan, D.: TrustedPals: Secure multiparty computation implemented with smart cards. In: Gollmann, D., Meier, J., Sabelfeld, A. (eds.) ESORICS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4189. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  20. Franklin, M., Galil, Z., Yung, M.: An overview of secure distributed computing. Technical Report TR CUCS-008-92, Columbia University (March 1992)

    Google Scholar 

  21. Franklin, M., Tsudik, G.: Secure group barter: Multi-party fair exchange with semi-trusted neutral parties. In: Hirschfeld, R. (ed.) FC 1998. LNCS, vol. 1465. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Garbinato, B., Rickebusch, I.: A topological condition for solving fair exchange in byzantine environments. In: Ning, P., Qing, S., Li, N. (eds.) ICICS 2006. LNCS, vol. 4307. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  23. Gomila, J., Capellà, M., Rotger, L.: A realistic protocol for multi-party certified electronic mail. In: Chan, A.H., Gligor, V.D. (eds.) ISC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2433. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  24. González-Deleito, N., Markowitch, O.: Exclusion-freeness in multi-party exchange protocols. In: Chan, A.H., Gligor, V.D. (eds.) ISC 2002. LNCS, vol. 2433. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  25. Guerraoui, R.: Non-blocking atomic commit in asynchronous distributed systems with failure detectors. Distributed Computing 15(1), 17–25 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Liu, P., Ning, P., Jajodia, S.: Avoiding loss of fairness owing to failures in fair data exchange systems. Decision Support Systems 31(3), 337–350 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lynch, N.: Distributed Algorithms. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Micali, S.: Simple and fast optimistic protocols for fair electronic exchange. In: PODC 2003, pp. 12–19. ACM Press, New York (2003)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  29. Mukhamedov, A., Kremer, S., Ritter, E.: Analysis of a multi-party fair exchange protocol and formal proof of correctness in the strand space model. In: S. Patrick, A., Yung, M. (eds.) FC 2005. LNCS, vol. 3570. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Pagnia, H., Gärtner, F.: On the impossibility of fair exchange without a trusted third party. Technical Report TUD-BS-1999-02, Department of Computer Science, Darmstadt University of Technology, Germany (March 1999)

    Google Scholar 

  31. Pagnia, H., Vogt, H., Gärtner, F.: Fair exchange. Comput. J. 46(1), 55–75 (2003)

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  32. Pfitzmann, B., Schuner, M., Waidner, M.: Optimal efficiency of optimistic contract signing. In: PODC 1998, pp. 113–122. ACM Press, New York (1998)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  33. Pnueli, A.: The temporal logic of programs. In: FOCS 1977. IEEE, Los Alamitos (1977)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rabin, M.: How to exchange secrets with oblivious transfer. Technical Report TR-81, Harvard University (May 1981)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Skeen, D.: Nonblocking commit protocols. In: SIGMOD Conference on Management of Data, pp. 133–142. ACM Press, New York (1981)

    Google Scholar 

  36. Syverson, P.: A different look at secure distributed computation. In: CSFW 1997, pp. 109–115. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  37. Tel, G.: Introduction to distributed algorithms, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2000)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Tygar, J.: Atomicity in electronic commerce. In: PODC 1996, pp. 8–26. ACM Press, New York (1996)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Technical University of Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    Simona Orzan

  2. ETH Zürich, Switzerland

    Mohammad Torabi Dashti

Authors
  1. Simona Orzan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammad Torabi Dashti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

John S. Fitzgerald Anne E. Haxthausen Husnu Yenigun

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Orzan, S., Torabi Dashti, M. (2008). Fair Exchange Is Incomparable to Consensus. In: Fitzgerald, J.S., Haxthausen, A.E., Yenigun, H. (eds) Theoretical Aspects of Computing - ICTAC 2008. ICTAC 2008. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 5160. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85762-4_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-85762-4_24

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-85761-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-85762-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation