TL;DR
This paper investigates transaction ordering in Bitcoin, revealing miners often deviate from fee-based norms for selfish or opaque reasons, highlighting the need for chain neutrality standards.
Contribution
It provides the first statistical evidence of miners manipulating transaction order for personal or hidden interests, challenging assumptions of fee-based prioritization.
Findings
Miners deviate from fee-based norms for selfish interests.
Evidence of dark-fee payments influencing transaction order.
Call for establishing neutrality norms in blockchain transaction ordering.
Abstract
Most public blockchain protocols, including the popular Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains, do not formally specify the order in which miners should select transactions from the pool of pending (or uncommitted) transactions for inclusion in the blockchain. Over the years, informal conventions or "norms" for transaction ordering have, however, emerged via the use of shared software by miners, e.g., the GetBlockTemplate (GBT) mining protocol in Bitcoin Core. Today, a widely held view is that Bitcoin miners prioritize transactions based on their offered "transaction fee-per-byte." Bitcoin users are, consequently, encouraged to increase the fees to accelerate the commitment of their transactions, particularly during periods of congestion. In this paper, we audit the Bitcoin blockchain and present statistically significant evidence of mining pools deviating from the norms to accelerate the…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
