Skip to content
Blockchain LabBlockchain LabTHE VENTURE STUDIO

LibraryConsensus1982Design paperCorpus record

The Byzantine Generals Problem

Byzantine Generals. Leslie Lamport, Robert Shostak and Marshall Pease.

With oral messages, more than two thirds must be loyal. With signed messages, any number of traitors can be tolerated if a loyal commander is heard.

A reading of the public document. Not a copy of it, and not a claim about a later network that reused the name.

When a pitch says Byzantine, ask whether messages are authenticated and what fraction of the set can equivocate.
Evidence
Primary paper
Re-measured
No
Assumptions
3
Records linked
4

Code

Source, repository, and what is actually hosted

  • Lamport, Shostak, Peasehttps://lamport.azurewebsites.net/pubs/byz.pdf
  • The source URL is not a GitHub repository. No code remote is invented.
  • Full text is not mirrored. Public availability is not a licence to copy the file onto this site.
  • Add to a reading list

01 Claim ledger

What the paper is allowed to say

Each row is a sentence already in the study. The status is the same on every row: a model claim, not a live measurement.

  1. Claim 01 · Paper model

    The defect

    Loyal generals must agree on one plan even when some generals send conflicting orders.

  2. Claim 02 · Paper model

    The rule

    With oral messages, more than two thirds must be loyal. With signed messages, any number of traitors can be tolerated if a loyal commander is heard.

  3. Claim 03 · Paper model

    How it is put together

    Oral messages can be forged by the receiver. Signed messages cannot, if signatures hold. The bound is about agreement, not about throughput.

  4. Claim 04 · Paper model

    Where the claim stops

    The oral-message bound does not apply to a chain with a known stake weight.

02 Three cuts

Observation, model, falsifier

A desk does not stop at the summary. Each claim is cut three ways, using only this study's own assumptions and checks. Nothing here is a new figure.

  1. 01 The defect

    Observation

    What the study says

    Loyal generals must agree on one plan even when some generals send conflicting orders.

    Model

    What has to hold

    The oral-message bound does not apply to a chain with a known stake weight.

    Falsifier

    What would retire it

    Does a loyal leader's value have to be the one that commits?

  2. 02 The rule

    Observation

    What the study says

    With oral messages, more than two thirds must be loyal. With signed messages, any number of traitors can be tolerated if a loyal commander is heard.

    Model

    What has to hold

    Signatures change the bound. Quoting the one-third rule without saying which model is a mistake.

    Falsifier

    What would retire it

    Are messages signed?

  3. 03 How it is put together

    Observation

    What the study says

    Oral messages can be forged by the receiver. Signed messages cannot, if signatures hold. The bound is about agreement, not about throughput.

    Model

    What has to hold

    Signatures change the bound. Quoting the one-third rule without saying which model is a mistake.

    Falsifier

    What would retire it

    Are messages signed?

  4. 04 Where the claim stops

    Observation

    What the study says

    The oral-message bound does not apply to a chain with a known stake weight.

    Model

    What has to hold

    The oral-message bound does not apply to a chain with a known stake weight.

    Falsifier

    What would retire it

    Is the bound one third or something weaker?

03 Sequence

One action, as an operating tape

  1. 01A commander sends an order. Lieutenants exchange what they heard.
  2. 02Each lieutenant decides on a value that all loyal lieutenants share.
  3. 03If the commander is loyal, that value is the commander's order.
  4. 04Are messages signed?

04 Load-bearing

The argument, and where a pitch drops it

  1. Why it is still on the desk

    The cut

    When a pitch says Byzantine, ask whether messages are authenticated and what fraction of the set can equivocate.

    Why it carries weight

    If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.

    Where it is dropped

    A later client, parameter or reward formula is a different object from this paragraph.

  2. After the text

    The cut

    PBFT, HotStuff and Tendermint are later systems under authenticated messages and partial synchrony. The 1982 paper is the problem statement.

    Why it carries weight

    If this cut is skipped, the paper's name is being used without the mechanism that makes the name mean anything.

    Where it is dropped

    The paper is not a networking protocol.

05 Register

What has to be true

  • Stake and threshold · Not re-measured

    The oral-message bound does not apply to a chain with a known stake weight.

  • Stake and threshold · Not re-measured

    Signatures change the bound. Quoting the one-third rule without saying which model is a mistake.

  • Network · Not re-measured

    The paper is not a networking protocol.

06 Divergence

What happened after the paper

PBFT, HotStuff and Tendermint are later systems under authenticated messages and partial synchrony. The 1982 paper is the problem statement.

A later client, parameter set, or reward formula is a different object. Cite this paper for the mechanism. Cite a primary release for the network. This desk has not re-run the proof.

07 Pre-mortem

What to check before you use the idea

  4. 0 of 3 marked on this browser. A mark is a reading note, not a pass, a rating, or a recommendation.

08 Anatomy

The paper, in the order a builder needs

The problem it names

Loyal generals must agree on one plan even when some generals send conflicting orders.

What the design proposes

  • Oral messages can be forged by the receiver.
  • Signed messages cannot, if signatures hold.
  • The bound is about agreement, not about throughput.

How the mechanism is specified

  • A commander sends an order. Lieutenants exchange what they heard.
  • Each lieutenant decides on a value that all loyal lieutenants share.
  • If the commander is loyal, that value is the commander's order.

What this page does not treat as proven

  • The oral-message bound does not apply to a chain with a known stake weight.
  • Signatures change the bound. Quoting the one-third rule without saying which model is a mistake.
  • The paper is not a networking protocol.

Why the desk still reads it

When a pitch says Byzantine, ask whether messages are authenticated and what fraction of the set can equivocate.

09 Lexicon

Terms, opened into the record

Oral message
A message the receiver can alter when forwarding.
Signed message
A message whose author a traitor cannot forge.

10 Repository

Every linked record on this page

Underlined words open a page that already exists: a concept, a protocol profile, a failure record, or another paper. If a word is not underlined, this desk does not have a record for it.

Protocols

This is Blockchain Lab's reading of a public design paper. It is not the paper, not a copy of it, and not an offer of tokens, equity, custody or a partnership. Later network behaviour can diverge from the text. Nothing here is investment, legal or technical advice.

Research status: Design paper. Last reviewed: 1 October 2026. This is a reading of a public paper, not investment, legal or security advice.