Revisiting Democratic Mining in Bitcoins: Its Weakness and Possible Remedies

  • Goutam PaulEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9478)


In ICISS 2014, Paul et al. identified several problems in the existing Proof-of-Work protocol for Bitcoin mining and proposed an alternative solution to generate blocks containing valid transactions. In their scheme, each miner generates a hash value locally and then the miners engage in a distributed computation of the minimum of the hashes to select the winner. The authors claimed that this will eliminate the advantage of the miners with more computational resources and therefore would be more democratic. However, in this paper we show that the new scheme is also subject to the same weakness in the sense that a miner with more computational resources can do some local computation in order to increase its winning probability. We also discuss possible remedies to this problem and their implications.


Bitcoins Cryptocurrency Democratic mining Electronic cash system Miners Proof-of-work 


  1. 1.
    Bitcoin-Wiki. Bitcoin Wikipedia.
  2. 2.
    Bitcoin-Wiki. Block hashing algorithm.
  3. 3.
    Bitcoin-Wiki. Proof of Work Protocol.
  4. 4.
    Bitcoin Magazine. Government bans Professor mining bitcoin supercomputer.
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Blockchain. Transactions.
  8. 8.
    CoinDesk. Under the Microscope: Economic and Environmental Costs of Bitcoin Mining.
  9. 9.
    Eyal, Ittay and Sirer, Emin Gün Sirer. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. CoRR, abs/1311.0243 (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Forbes. Brilliant But Evil: Gaming Company Fined \( \$1\) Million For Secretly Using Players’ Computers To Mine Bitcoin.
  11. 11.
    Frequently Asked Questions. Transactions.
  12. 12.
    Gizmodo. The World’s Most Powerful Computer Network Is Being Wasted on Bitcoin.
  13. 13.
    Kuhn, F., Locher, T., Schmid,S.: Distributed computation of the mode. In: Bazzi, R.A., Patt-Shamir, B. (eds.) Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC 2008, Toronto, Canada, 18–21 August 2008, pp. 15–24. ACM (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Learn Cryptography. 51% Attack.
  15. 15.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. May 2009Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Paul, G., Sarkar, P., Mukherjee, S.: Towards a more democratic mining in bitcoins. In: Prakash, A., Shyamasundar, R. (eds.) ICISS 2014. LNCS, vol. 8880, pp. 185–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2014) Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Santoro, N.: Design and Analysis of Distributed Algorithms. Wiley Series on Parallel and Distributed Computing, pp. 71–76. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    The Guardian. Student uses university computers to mine Dogecoin.
  19. 19.
    The Harvard Crimson. Harvard Research Computing Resources Misused for Dogecoin Mining Operation.
  20. 20.
    Wackerly, D.D., Mendenhall III, W., Scheaffer, R.L.: Mathematical Statistics with Applications. Duxbury Advanced Series, sixth edition (2002)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wikipedia. Proof-of-stake – Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Cryptology and Security Research Unit, R. C. Bose Centre for Cryptology and SecurityIndian Statistical InstituteKolkataIndia

Personalised recommendations