LibraryConsensus2016Design paperCorpus record
On the Security and Performance of Proof of Work Blockchains
Proof-of-work security. Arthur Gervais, Ghassan O. Karame, Karl Wüst, Vasileios Glykantzis, Hubert Ritzdorf and Srdjan Capkun.
The paper builds a quantitative model of stale blocks, double-spends and selfish mining across proof-of-work parameters.
A reading of the public paper. Not a copy, not a benchmark, and not a claim about any later network.
A parameter change sold as 'more throughput' without a stale-block model has not answered this paper.
- Evidence
- Primary paper
- Re-measured
- No
- Assumptions
- 3
- Records linked
- 2
Code
Source, repository, and what is actually hosted
- ePrint 2016/555https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/555
- 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.
Claim 01 · Paper model
The defect
Block interval, block size and network delay are argued about separately. An attacker experiences them together.
Claim 02 · Paper model
The proposal
The paper builds a quantitative model of stale blocks, double-spends and selfish mining across proof-of-work parameters.
Claim 03 · Paper model
Stale rate is the measured link between size, interval and delay.
A double-spend succeeds more often when the merchant waits less and the attacker sees stalls.
Claim 04 · Paper model
The bound
The 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
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.
01 The defect
Observation
What the study says
Block interval, block size and network delay are argued about separately. An attacker experiences them together.
Model
What has to hold
The 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Which year's network delay was used?
02 The proposal
Observation
What the study says
The paper builds a quantitative model of stale blocks, double-spends and selfish mining across proof-of-work parameters.
Model
What has to hold
The paper does not set a universal safe confirmation count.
Falsifier
What would retire it
What stale rate does the size and interval imply?
03 Stale rate is the measured link between size, interval and delay.
Observation
What the study says
A double-spend succeeds more often when the merchant waits less and the attacker sees stalls.
Model
What has to hold
It is not a valuation.
Falsifier
What would retire it
What stale rate does the size and interval imply?
04 The bound
Observation
What the study says
The 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
Model
What has to hold
The 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Which year's network delay was used?
03 Sequence
One action, as an operating tape
- 01Fix a block interval and a size.
- 02Simulate propagation and the adversary.
- 03Read the stale rate and the double-spend probability off that model, not off a slogan.
- 04How many confirmations does the model need against a given attacker?
04 Load-bearing
The argument, and where a pitch drops it
What the paper is for
The cut
A parameter change sold as 'more throughput' without a stale-block model has not answered this paper.
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 does not set a universal safe confirmation count.
What happened after
The cut
Compact blocks and relay networks exist partly because stale rate is this expensive. Cite the year of the measurement.
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 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
05 Register
What has to be true
Network · Not re-measured
The 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
Model · Not re-measured
The paper does not set a universal safe confirmation count.
Model · Not re-measured
It is not a valuation.
06 Divergence
What happened after the paper
Compact blocks and relay networks exist partly because stale rate is this expensive. Cite the year of the measurement.
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
- 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
Block interval, block size and network delay are argued about separately. An attacker experiences them together.
What the design proposes
- Stale rate is the measured link between size, interval and delay.
- A double-spend succeeds more often when the merchant waits less and the attacker sees stalls.
- The numbers belong to the model and the traces they used.
How the mechanism is specified
- Fix a block interval and a size.
- Simulate propagation and the adversary.
- Read the stale rate and the double-spend probability off that model, not off a slogan.
What this page does not treat as proven
- The 2016 traces are not the current relay network.
- The paper does not set a universal safe confirmation count.
- It is not a valuation.
Why the desk still reads it
A parameter change sold as 'more throughput' without a stale-block model has not answered this paper.
09 Lexicon
Terms, opened into the record
- Stale block
- A valid block that lost the race and does not end up in the chain.
- Double-spend
- A payment that is reversed by a competing chain.
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.
Concepts
Papers
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.