Praos is much more efficient then original Ouroboros protocol, but it seems praos is not implemented yet. Will it get implemented before decentralization?
Praos is part of Basho as mentioned on https://cardanoroadmap.com/
4 Likes
Thanks, then I guess it’s planed in next year.
But I think original Ouroboros protocol is vulnerable to DDoS attack, because attacker only need to attack slot leaders which are known at the beginning of epoch.
Also if attacker uses lots of nodes to participate the MPC, could slow down the protocol execution.
I did not realise that Ouroboros was open to attack. If that’s the case, then how can it be reported to be the first provably secure algorithm for PoS?
Ouroboros is not open to an attack. Nodes are, to the same extend as any web-server. The only information Ouroboros discloses about nodes is their block-signing public-key and delegation address that’s it. So the nodes are at the same level of exposure as with bitcoin, for example.
The only difference in that in bitcoin if you take down a node - someone else will create the block, but in Ouroboros - if you take down a node - slot remains empty. But there’s absolutely no danger in this to the protocol, until 51% of all nodes are taken down which would be an event comparable to a major global internet fail. For example - in Ouroboros Praos some slots remain empty by the assigning function itself, and it is considered to be one of the safety measures, providing the whole network time to synchronise.
So open delegation schedule is not in any way more dangerous than the bitcoin system. And the sentiment should be not that Ouroboros is less safe than Praos - the sentiment should be that Praos will be even more secure than Ourorobros.
There will be a threshold for MPC-participation so any attacker can split his stake only that many times.
2 Likes
For reference,
Please can read about various attacks on Ouroboros classic and if/how they are handled in the original paper at page 45 https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/889.pdf
1 Like
Ok. So if the algorithm is secure, what exactly is the “delay” in staking? Is it the rewards model and or technical matters setting up the nodes. The peer reviewed paper for the algorithm has been done for some time? There just seemed to be a lot of momentum then it appeared the brakes went on. I understand things shifted to upgrading Daedalus. But, I didn’t understand how smart contracts seemed to jump ahead of staking?
I have not followed it closely, but staking is really the least of our concerns…
Smart contracts and the Virtual machine are a much more important matter getting out, so real things can Start taking place.
Staking changes nothing, other than we as a collective will pay for the hosting rather than IOHK, and yeah it will be decentralized.
1 Like
Good point, better to have the contracts and VM our front.
FWIW as far as I remember Charles said that there will be no minimum stake limits for running a stake pool. This heavily implies that Praos will be implemented on the staking testnet as Ouroboros has mandatory minimum stake limits.
There is no reason why IOHK would not implement an improved version of Ouroboros for Shelley if viable (praos (possible), genesis (very unlikely), hydra (extremely unlikely). If the roadmap can be accelerated in certain areas, without compromising stability/integrity, then it certainly makes sense to do so.