skip to main content
research-article

Peer-to-peer affine commitment using bitcoin

Published:03 June 2015Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

The power of linear and affine logic lies in their ability to model state change. However, in a trustless, peer-to-peer setting, it is difficult to force principals to commit to state changes. We show how to solve the peer-to-peer affine commitment problem using a generalization of Bitcoin in which transactions deal in types rather than numbers. This has applications to proof-carrying authorization and mechanically executable contracts. Importantly, our system can be---and is---implemented on top of the existing Bitcoin network, so there is no need to recruit computing power to a new protocol.

References

  1. A. W. Appel and E. W. Felten. Proof-carrying authentication. In ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. A. Barber. Dual intuitionistic linear logic. Technical Report ECSLFCS-96-347, Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Sept. 1996.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. L. Bauer. Access Control for the Web via Proof-carrying Authorization. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, Nov. 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bitcoin wiki. Script. Wiki page at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/ Script, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bitcoin wiki. BIP 0011: M-of-N standard transactions. Wiki page at https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0011, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. D. Garg and F. Pfenning. Non-interference in constructive authorization logic. In 19th IEEE Computer Security Foundations Workshop, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. D. Garg, L. Bauer, K. Bowers, F. Pfenning, and M. Reiter. A linear logic of authorization and knowledge. In Computer Security— ESORICS 2006: 11th European Symposium on Research in Computer Security, volume 4189 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 297–312. Springer, Sept. 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J.-Y. Girard. Linear logic. Theoretical Computer Science, 50:1–102, 1987. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S. Haber and W. S. Stornetta. How to time-stamp a digital document. Journal of Cryptology, 3(2), 1991. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. R. Harper and F. Pfenning. On equivalence and canonical forms in the LF type theory. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic, 6(1), 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. R. Harper, F. Honsell, and G. Plotkin. A framework for defining logics. Journal of the ACM, 40(1):143–184, Jan. 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. M. Hearn et al. Contracts. Wiki page at https://en.bitcoin.it/ wiki/Contracts, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. T. Hvitved. A survey of formal languages for contracts. In Formal Language and Analysis of Contract-Oriented Software, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Killerstorm. The theory of colored coins. GitHub page at https://github.com/bitcoinx/colored-coin-tools/ wiki/colored_coins_intro, 2013.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. S. Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Disseminated to The Cryptography Mailing List, Nov. 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. S. Peyton Jones, J.-M. Eber, and J. Seward. Composing contracts: an adventure in financial engineering. In 2000 ACM International Conference on Functional Programming, Montreal, Sept. 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. E. D. Rather, D. R. Colburn, and C. H. Moore. The evolution of Forth. SIGPLAN Notices, Mar. 1993. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. M. Rosenfeld. Overview of colored coins. Available at https: //bitcoil.co.il/BitcoinX.pdf, Dec. 2012.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. R. J. Simmons. Substructural Logical Specifications. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, School of Computer Science, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Nov. 2012. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. N. Szabo. Formalizing and securing relationships on public networks. First Monday, 2(9), Sept. 1997.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. G. Wood. Ethereum: A secure decentralised generalised transaction ledger. Available online at http://gavwood.com/Paper.pdf, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Peer-to-peer affine commitment using bitcoin

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in

    Full Access

    • Published in

      cover image ACM SIGPLAN Notices
      ACM SIGPLAN Notices  Volume 50, Issue 6
      PLDI '15
      June 2015
      630 pages
      ISSN:0362-1340
      EISSN:1558-1160
      DOI:10.1145/2813885
      • Editor:
      • Andy Gill
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      • cover image ACM Conferences
        PLDI '15: Proceedings of the 36th ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation
        June 2015
        630 pages
        ISBN:9781450334686
        DOI:10.1145/2737924

      Copyright © 2015 ACM

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 3 June 2015

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader
    About Cookies On This Site

    We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

    Learn more

    Got it!