Bilinear Sybil Cost Ensures Defense Maintains Influence Cost
Original title: Beyond Identity Creation: Bilinear Sybil Cost in Identities and Time
Four conditions suffice for defenses to achieve bilinear Sybil cost using verifiable delay functions with A of 2 to 8.
Sybil defenses price identity creation but not ongoing influence. A defense has bilinear Sybil cost with ratio A if keeping s identities active for T periods costs at least sT/A honest units. Recurrence alone does not guarantee this cost. Four sufficient conditions are identity binding, freshness, a shared deadline, and sequential non-batchable work. These yield a bilinear total cost and a bound on active identities by available processors.
- Keeping s identities active for T periods costs at least sT/A honest units
- Identity binding, freshness, shared deadline, and sequential non-batchable work achieve bilinear Sybil cost
- One active identity per core per period measured
- No gain from batching up to 1,000 identities
From the original article
1 min read at arxiv.orgSybil defenses price the creation of an identity, yet influence goes, again and again, to active identities. We study the cost of maintaining influence. A defense has a bilinear Sybil cost with ratio $A$ if keeping $s$ identities active for $T$ periods costs at least $sT/A$ honest units: the average cost per identity-window is at least $1/A$ times an honest participant's cost.
By Homayoun Maleki · arxiv.org
A short excerpt; the article and its images belong to the publisher. Summary, key facts and assessment above are AI-written from the article and can be wrong.