Skip to main content

Information Sharing in the Presence of Adversarial Nodes Using Raft

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2021, Volume 3 (FTC 2021)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems ((LNNS,volume 360))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1186 Accesses

Abstract

Consensus algorithms are a prominent component in decentralized systems involving multiple unreliable nodes. Since the days Blockchain was first introduced, decentralized systems have been used in many applications such as supply chain management and information sharing paradigms. Raft is a consensus algorithm based on “Paxos” that is used for replicated state machines when a group of nodes is required to have the same state at any moment. This paper therefore proposes an alternative version of the Raft consensus algorithm to allow sharing information among nodes in a secured fashion while maintaining the security features of the original Raft algorithm even in the presence of adversarial nodes. The proposed model can be implemented to improve cooperation among parties, especially, in resource-constrained platforms where a regular encrypted communication method can heavily affect the system. Our analysis illustrates that the proposed model is practical to be used in many worldwide applications.

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

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 229.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 299.99
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

References

  1. Bamakan, S.M.H., Motavali, A., Bondarti, A.B.: A survey of blockchain consensus algorithms performance evaluation criteria. Expert Systems with Applications, p. 113385 (2020)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Copeland, C., Zhong, H.: Tangaroa: a byzantine fault tolerant raft (2016)

    Google Scholar 

  3. De Angelis, S., Aniello, L., Baldoni, R., Lombardi, F., Margheri, A., Sassone, V.: Pbft vs proof-of-authority: applying the cap theorem to permissioned blockchain (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  4. De Kruijff, J., Weigand, H.: Understanding the blockchain using enterprise ontology. In: International Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering, pp. 29–43. Springer (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Deters, F.G., Mehl, M.R.: Does posting facebook status updates increase or decrease loneliness? an online social networking experiment. Soc. Psychol. Personality Sci. 4(5), 579–586 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Dinev, T., Hart, P., Mullen, M.R.: Internet privacy concerns and beliefs about government surveillance-an empirical investigation. J. Strategic Inf. Syst. 17(3), 214–233 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. King, S., Nadal, S.: Ppcoin: peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof-of-stake. self-published paper, August 19:1 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Li, S., Lin, B.: Accessing information sharing and information quality in supply chain management. Decision Support Syst. 42(3), 1641–1656 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. López-Pintado, O., García-Bañuelos, L., Dumas, M., Weber, I.: Caterpillar: a blockchain-based business process management system. In: BPM (Demos) (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Mendling, J., et al.: Blockchains for business process management-challenges and opportunities. ACM Trans. Manag. Inf. Syst. (TMIS) 9(1), 1–16 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Technical report, Manubot (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Ongaro, D., Ousterhout, J.: In search of an understandable consensus algorithm. In: 2014 USENIX Annual Technical Conference (USENIX ATC 2014), pp. 305–319 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Pease, M., Shostak, R., Lamport, L.: Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. J. ACM (JACM) 27(2), 228–234 (1980)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Weber, I., Xu, X., Riveret, R., Governatori, G., Ponomarev, A., Mendling, J.: Untrusted business process monitoring and execution using blockchain. In: La Rosa, M., Loos, P., Pastor, O. (eds.) BPM 2016. LNCS, vol. 9850, pp. 329–347. Springer, Cham (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45348-4_19

Download references

Acknowledgment

Research was sponsored by the Army Research Office and was accomplished under Grant Number W911NF-18-1-0483. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Office or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation herein.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Linir Zamir .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Zamir, L., Nojoumian, M. (2022). Information Sharing in the Presence of Adversarial Nodes Using Raft. In: Arai, K. (eds) Proceedings of the Future Technologies Conference (FTC) 2021, Volume 3. FTC 2021. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, vol 360. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-89912-7_13

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics