Resilient Alerting Protocols for Blockchains
Marwa Mouallem, Lorenz Breidenbach, Ittay Eyal, Ari Juels
Abstract
Smart contracts are stateful programs deployed on blockchains; they secure over a trillion dollars in transaction value per year. High-stakes smart contracts often rely on timely alerts about external events, but prior work has not analyzed their resilience to an attacker suppressing alerts via bribery. We formalize this challenge in a cryptoeconomic setting as the alerting problem, giving rise to a game between a bribing adversary and 𝑛 rational participants, who pay a penalty if they are caught deviating from the protocol. We establish a quadratic, i.e., 𝑂 (𝑛 2 ), upper bound, whereas a straightforward alerting protocol only achieves 𝑂 (𝑛) bribery cost. We present a simultaneous game that asymptotically achieves the quadratic upper bound and thus asymptotically-optimal bribery resistance. We then present two protocols that implement our simultaneous game: The first leverages a strong network synchrony assumption. The second relaxes this strong assumption and instead takes advantage of trusted hardware and blockchain proofof-publication to establish a timed commitment scheme. These two protocols are constant-time but incur a linear storage overhead on the blockchain. We analyze a third, sequential alerting protocol that optimistically incurs no on-chain storage overhead, at the expense of 𝑂 (𝑛) worst-case execution time. All three protocols achieve asymptotically-optimal bribery costs, but with different resource and performance tradeoffs. Together, they illuminate a rich design space for practical solutions to the alerting problem.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext f5c8a3e6-0a84-4d18-91b3-db5ab4e75652Cited by top-tier papers1
Ask how each one uses itBuilds on5
- Prism: Deconstructing the Blockchain to Approach Physical LimitsVivek Kumar Bagaria, Sreeram Kannan, David Tse, Giulia Fanti et al.CCS 2019 · 256 citations
- zkBridge: Trustless Cross-chain Bridges Made PracticalTiancheng Xie, Jiaheng Zhang, Zerui Cheng, Fan Zhang et al.CCS 2022 · 131 citations
- Blockchain Bribing Attacks and the Efficacy of CounterincentivesDimitris Karakostas, Aggelos Kiayias, Thomas ZachariasCCS 2024 · 5 citations
- Prrr: Personal Random Rewards for Blockchain ReportingHongyin Chen, Yubin Ke, Xiaotie Deng, Ittay EyalS&P 2026 · 2 citations
- Agora: Trust Less and Open More in Verification for Confidential ComputingHongbo Chen, Quan Zhou, Sen Yang, Sixuan Dang et al.OOPSLA 2025
Related papers
- Practical Settlement Bounds for Proof-of-Work BlockchainsPeter Gazi, Ling Ren, Alexander RussellCCS 2022 · 17 citations
- Breaking Omertà: On Threshold Cryptography, Smart Collusion, and WhistleblowingMahimna Kelkar, Aadityan Ganesh, Aditi Partap, Joseph Bonneau et al.CCS 2025 · 1 citation
- MAD-HTLC: Because HTLC is Crazy-Cheap to AttackItay Tsabary, Matan Yechieli, Alex Manuskin, Ittay EyalS&P 2021 · 87 citations
- He-HTLC: Revisiting Incentives in HTLCSarisht Wadhwa, Jannis Stoeter, Fan Zhang, Kartik NayakNDSS 2023
- On Identifying Sound Conditions for Frontrunning ResistanceSebastian Holler, Anna Piscitelli, Jannik Albrecht, Stephan Dübler et al.CCS 2026
