International Symposium on Distributed Computing

Distributed Computing pp 276-291 | Cite as

Fast Byzantine Leader Election in Dynamic Networks

  • John Augustine
  • Gopal Pandurangan
  • Peter Robinson
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9363)


We study the fundamental Byzantine leader election problem in dynamic networks where the topology can change from round to round and nodes can also experience heavy churn (i.e., nodes can join and leave the network continuously over time). We assume the full information model where the Byzantine nodes have complete knowledge about the entire state of the network at every round (including random choices made by all the nodes), have unbounded computational power and can deviate arbitrarily from the protocol. The churn is controlled by an adversary that has complete knowledge and control over which nodes join and leave and at what times and also may rewire the topology in every round and has unlimited computational power, but is oblivious to the random choices made by the algorithm.

Our main contribution is an \(O(\log ^3 n)\) round algorithm that achieves Byzantine leader election under the presence of up to \(O({n}^{1/2 - \varepsilon })\) Byzantine nodes (for a small constant \(\epsilon > 0\)) and a churn of up to \(O(\sqrt{n}/{\text {polylog}}(n))\) nodes per round (where n is the stable network size). The algorithm elects a leader with probability at least \(1-n^{-\varOmega (1)}\) and guarantees that it is an honest node with probability at least \(1-n^{-\varOmega (1)}\); assuming the algorithm succeeds, the leader’s identity will be known to a \(1-o(1)\) fraction of the honest nodes. Our algorithm is fully-distributed, lightweight, and is simple to implement. It is also scalable, as it runs in polylogarithmic (in n) time and requires nodes to send and receive messages of only polylogarithmic size per round. To the best of our knowledge, our algorithm is the first scalable solution for Byzantine leader election in a dynamic network with a high rate of churn; our protocol can also be used to solve Byzantine agreement in a straightforward way. We also show how to implement an (almost-everywhere) public coin with constant bias in a dynamic network with Byzantine nodes and provide a mechanism for enabling honest nodes to store information reliably in the network, which might be of independent interest.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Afek, Y., Awerbuch, B., Gafni, E.: Applying static network protocols to dynamic networks. In: FOCS 1987, pp. 358–370 (1987)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Afek, Y., Gafni, E., Rosen, A.: The slide mechanism with applications in dynamic networks. In: ACM PODC, pp. 35–46 (1992)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Augustine, J., Molla, A.R., Morsy, E., Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P., Upfal, E.: Storage and search in dynamic peer-to-peer networks. In: SPAA, pp. 53–62 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Augustine, J., Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P.: Fast byzantine agreement in dynamic networks. In: PODC, pp. 74–83 (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Augustine, J., Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P., Roche, S., Upfal, E.: Enabling efficient and robust distributed computation in highly dynamic networks. In: FOCS (to appear, 2015)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Augustine, J., Pandurangan, G., Robinson, P., Upfal, E.: Towards robust and efficient computation in dynamic peer-to-peer networks. In: SODA, pp. 551–569 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Avin, C., Koucký, M., Lotker, Z.: How to explore a fast-changing world (cover time of a simple random walk on evolving graphs). In: Aceto, L., Damgård, I., Goldberg, L.A., Halldórsson, M.M., Ingólfsdóttir, A., Walukiewicz, I. (eds.) ICALP 2008, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5125, pp. 121–132. Springer, Heidelberg (2008) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Awerbuch, B., Patt-Shamir, B., Peleg, D., Saks, M.E.: Adapting to asynchronous dynamic networks. In: STOC 1992, pp. 557–570 (1992)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bagchi, A., Bhargava, A., Chaudhary, A., Eppstein, D., Scheideler, C.: The effect of faults on network expansion. Theory Comput. Syst. 39(6), 903–928 (2006)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Casteigts, A., Flocchini, P., Quattrociocchi, W., Santoro, N.: Time-varying graphs and dynamic networks. CoRR, abs/1012.0009 (2010). Short version in ADHOC-NOW 2011Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Das Sarma, A., Molla, A.R., Pandurangan, G.: Fast distributed computation in dynamic networks via random walks. In: Aguilera, M.K. (ed.) DISC 2012. LNCS, vol. 7611, pp. 136–150. Springer, Heidelberg (2012) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Doerr, B., Goldberg, L.A., Minder, L., Sauerwald, T., Scheideler, C.: Stabilizing consensus with the power of two choices. In: SPAA, pp. 149–158 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dolev, S.: Self-stabilization. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dwork, C., Peleg, D., Pippenger, N., Upfal, E.: Fault tolerance in networks of bounded degree. SIAM J. Comput. 17(5), 975–988 (1988)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fiat, A., Saia, J.: Censorship resistant peer-to-peer content addressable networks. In: SODA, pp. 94–103 (2002)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gafni, E., Bertsekas, B.: Distributed algorithms for generating loop-free routes in networks with frequently changing topology. IEEE Trans. Comm. 29(1), 11–18 (1981)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Guerraoui, R., Huc, F., Kermarrec, A.-M.: Highly dynamic distributed computing with byzantine failures. In: PODC, pp. 176–183 (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hildrum, K., Kubiatowicz, J.D.: Asymptotically efficient approaches to fault-tolerance in peer-to-peer networks. In: Fich, F.E. (ed.) DISC 2003. LNCS, vol. 2848, pp. 321–336. Springer, Heidelberg (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kapron, B.M., Kempe, D., King, V., Saia, J., Sanwalani, V.: Fast asynchronous byzantine agreement and leader election with full information. ACM Transactions on Algorithms 6(4) (2010)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    King, V., Saia, J.: Breaking the O(n\(^{2}\)) bit barrier: scalable Byzantine agreement with an adaptive adversary. In: PODC, pp. 420–429 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    King, V., Saia, J.: Faster agreement via a spectral method for detecting malicious behavior. In: SODA, pp. 785–800 (2014)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    King, V., Saia, J., Sanwalani, V., Vee, E.: Scalable leader election. In: SODA, pp. 990–999 (2006)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    King, V., Saia, J., Sanwalani, V., Vee, E.: Towards secure and scalable computation in peer-to-peer networks. In: FOCS, pp. 87–98 (2006)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kuhn, F., Lynch, N., Oshman, R.: Distributed computation in dynamic networks. In: ACM STOC, pp. 513–522 (2010)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kuhn, F., Oshman, R., Moses, Y.: Coordinated consensus in dynamic networks. In: PODC, pp. 1–10 (2011)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Law, C., Siu, K.-Y.: Distributed construction of random expander networks. In: Twenty-Second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications. INFOCOM 2003, vol. 3, pp. 2133–2143. IEEE Societies, March–April 2003Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Naor, M., Wieder, U.: A simple fault tolerant distributed hash table. In: IPTPS, pp. 88–97 (2003)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    O’Dell, R., Wattenhofer, R.: Information dissemination in highly dynamic graphs. In: DIALM-POMC, pp. 104–110 (2005)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pandurangan, G., Raghavan, P., Upfal, E.: Building low-diameter p2p networks. In: FOCS, pp. 492–499 (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scheideler, C.: How to spread adversarial nodes?: rotate! In: STOC, pp. 704–713 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Upfal, E.: Tolerating a linear number of faults in networks of bounded degree. Inf. Comput. 115(2), 312–320 (1994)MATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Augustine
    • 1
  • Gopal Pandurangan
    • 2
  • Peter Robinson
    • 3
  1. 1.Indian Institute of Technology MadrasChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of HoustonHoustonUSA
  3. 3.Queen’s University BelfastBelfastUK

Personalised recommendations