LibraryConsensus2015Design paperCorpus record
Research Perspectives and Challenges for Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies
Bitcoin SoK. Joseph Bonneau, Andrew Miller, Jeremy Clark, Arvind Narayanan, Joshua A. Kroll and Edward W. Felten.
This systematisation names the stability and consensus questions, the client problems, and the open research problems as of its date. It is a map, not a new protocol.
A reading of the public paper. Not a copy, not a benchmark, and not a claim about any later network.
When a pitch invents a new problem name, see whether this map already had it.
- Evidence
- Primary paper
- Re-measured
- No
- Assumptions
- 3
- Records linked
- 4
Code
Source, repository, and what is actually hosted
- ePrint 2015/261https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/261
- 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
By 2015 the bitcoin literature was already a pile of blog posts and papers that did not share definitions.
Claim 02 · Paper model
The proposal
This systematisation names the stability and consensus questions, the client problems, and the open research problems as of its date. It is a map, not a new protocol.
Claim 03 · Paper model
A SoK is allowed to expire.
The value is the decomposition: consensus, mining, clients, anonymity, extensions.
Claim 04 · Paper model
The bound
It proves no new theorem about a coin you can buy.
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
02 The proposal
Observation
What the study says
This systematisation names the stability and consensus questions, the client problems, and the open research problems as of its date. It is a map, not a new protocol.
Model
What has to hold
Anonymity claims inside it are about the systems of that year.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Which section is the claim from?
03 A SoK is allowed to expire.
Observation
What the study says
The value is the decomposition: consensus, mining, clients, anonymity, extensions.
Model
What has to hold
Anonymity claims inside it are about the systems of that year.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Has a later paper in the library closed that item?
04 The bound
Observation
What the study says
It proves no new theorem about a coin you can buy.
Model
What has to hold
It proves no new theorem about a coin you can buy.
Falsifier
What would retire it
Is the citation being used as a map or as a proof?
03 Sequence
One action, as an operating tape
- 01Use it to see which problem a new paper claims to close.
- 02Check whether the problem is still open.
- 03Do not treat the 2015 threat list as a 2026 audit.
- 04Which section is the claim from?
04 Load-bearing
The argument, and where a pitch drops it
What the paper is for
The cut
When a pitch invents a new problem name, see whether this map already had it.
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.
What happened after
The cut
Many of the open problems it lists were later papers in this library: selfish mining, clients, anonymity, proof of stake.
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
Anonymity claims inside it are about the systems of that year.
05 Register
What has to be true
Model · Not re-measured
It proves no new theorem about a coin you can buy.
Model · Not re-measured
Anonymity claims inside it are about the systems of that year.
Model · Not re-measured
It is not the bitcoin white paper.
06 Divergence
What happened after the paper
Many of the open problems it lists were later papers in this library: selfish mining, clients, anonymity, proof of stake.
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
By 2015 the bitcoin literature was already a pile of blog posts and papers that did not share definitions.
What the design proposes
- A SoK is allowed to expire.
- The value is the decomposition: consensus, mining, clients, anonymity, extensions.
- Citing it as proof of a modern chain is a mistake.
How the mechanism is specified
- Use it to see which problem a new paper claims to close.
- Check whether the problem is still open.
- Do not treat the 2015 threat list as a 2026 audit.
What this page does not treat as proven
- It proves no new theorem about a coin you can buy.
- Anonymity claims inside it are about the systems of that year.
- It is not the bitcoin white paper.
Why the desk still reads it
When a pitch invents a new problem name, see whether this map already had it.
09 Lexicon
Terms, opened into the record
- SoK
- A systematisation of knowledge. A map of a field, not a protocol.
- Stability
- The informal property that a payment stops being reversible.
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.
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.