You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jan 3, 2023. It is now read-only.
Users in HC should have a way to submit fraud proofs to notify consensus faults in a subnet. These proofs are committed in the parent to trigger the slashing of miners' collateral. The most straightforward way in which we can build a fraud proof is:
If the consensus fault is in epoch n, and the latest checkpoint committed to the parent is in checkpoint n-i, a user could send to the parent SCA the full state from n-i to n (where the attack is).
The parent SCA would replay the state and check if any of the consensus rules have been violated for the blocks from n-i to n to determine if there was a consensus fault and miners should be slashed. This can be generalized not for the latest checkpoint but for any n and i in the subnets history.
(In the future we should explore the use of Lurk and ZKProofs for fraud proofs)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Users in HC should have a way to submit fraud proofs to notify consensus faults in a subnet. These proofs are committed in the parent to trigger the slashing of miners' collateral. The most straightforward way in which we can build a fraud proof is:
n
, and the latest checkpoint committed to the parent is in checkpointn-i
, a user could send to the parent SCA the full state fromn-i
ton
(where the attack is).n-i
ton
to determine if there was a consensus fault and miners should be slashed. This can be generalized not for the latest checkpoint but for anyn
andi
in the subnets history.(In the future we should explore the use of Lurk and ZKProofs for fraud proofs)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: