![Protocol – Content Abstraction and Access
Control
Blockchains are not efficient for data storing due to its distributed architecture and proof of work
mechanisms
How to achieve content authentication?
Remember
this
Symbol?
Content Abstraction
Checksum
How to store?
Recall Hashmaps from OO.
programming
Solidity
Mapping
x: Update Provider Address
(msg.sender)
y: Update Name Digest
_Update_abstraction[x][y] :
Checksum
z: Network Owner Address
_access_tickets[x][y][z][w] :
Ticket
How about a mapping
of mappings of
mappings?
O(1)
w: IoT Device ID](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/cascondecentralizediotupdate-blockchainandsmartcontracts-191211040235/85/Cascon-Decentralized-IoT-update-Blockchain-and-Smart-Contracts-19-320.jpg)
Cascon Decentralized IoT update - Blockchain and Smart Contracts
- 1. Decentralized and Secure Delivery Network of IoT Update Files Based on Ethereum Smart Contracts and Blockchain Technology Salar Arbabi Mehdi Shajari
- 2. Agenda System Architecture Problem Definition, Solution and Goals 2 1
- 4. Conclusion 5
- 5. Before starting the main part of the presentation Blockchain Technology fundamentals Smart Contracts Ethereum Principals Previous and related works
- 6. Part 1. Problem Definition, Solution and Goals
- 7. Problem Definition Based on Gartner Inc. 25 billion connected “things” will be in use by the end of 2020. Control Structure: Centralized Architecture, Trusted Third Parties, Central Controller Security Privacy Availability Cost Single Point Of Failure!
- 9. Ethereum Smart Contracts to Control Business Logic Use of Blockchain as a Distributed Public Ledger Decentralized Control Mechanism Micropayment Incentives to Boost Full Nodes’ Participation in File Transfer P2P File Transfer Distributed File Storage IDEA
- 10. Goals Decentralization Security Privacy Cost Reduction Eliminate Single Point of Failure Transparency Availability Authentication Access Control Anonymity Copyright Provider in Control of the Content Maintenance Cost Security Costs
- 12. Ethereum Contract Accounts Account Management Layer Ethereum Externally Owned Accounts (EOA) Ethereum Wallets Presentation Layer Abstract Binary Interface (ABI) Web-3 Technology Abstract Binary Interface (ABI) GUI Blockchain Layer (Ethereum) Cryptocurrency (Ether) Smart Contracts Light Client Support Network Layer Distributed Storage Distributed Hash Tables (DHT) P2P File Transfer Incentive Mechanism
- 14. Limitations IoT devices are often limited in resources IoT Devices can’t store the blockchain Blockchain has limited storage and computation capability
- 15. Roles IoT Devices with limited resources and capabilities Intra-Network connection Update Receiver A User who owns a few IoT devices to use in his own network Transacts in Ethereum on IoT Devices’ behalf IoT Device Vendor Update Producer 1 2 3Network Owner IoT Devices – End Peers – Target Nodes Vendor
- 16. Roles (2) Update Distributor Registers IoT Devices Provided by each vendor 4 5 Vendor Registrar Contract Full Node CONTRACT
- 17. Registration CONTRACT Vendor Vendor Registrar Contract Network Owner Purchase Registers Device to enable it and benefit update possibilityDeploy Provide Protocol - Registration Registration with network owner’s EOA
- 18. Protocol Proposed Protocol Update provider Super Contract (Proposed Framework) Instance 1 (Service 1) Instance 2 (Service 2) Network Owner asks for a service (update in our case) {Full Nodes (P2P File Distributors) Update Provider Injects new encrypted update to the P2P Distribution Network Many to many relationship Each instance for one service { update provider informs our system of new content release Contract checks for an agreement Auction for Transferring File and receiving reward Grants Access (Ticket) in Case of Agreement Auction winner full node transfers encrypted update (Network Owner) Gets decryption key from related service contract Decrypted update
- 19. Protocol – Content Abstraction and Access Control Blockchains are not efficient for data storing due to its distributed architecture and proof of work mechanisms How to achieve content authentication? Remember this Symbol? Content Abstraction Checksum How to store? Recall Hashmaps from OO. programming Solidity Mapping x: Update Provider Address (msg.sender) y: Update Name Digest _Update_abstraction[x][y] : Checksum z: Network Owner Address _access_tickets[x][y][z][w] : Ticket How about a mapping of mappings of mappings? O(1) w: IoT Device ID
- 20. Protocol – Content Abstraction and AuthenticationProposed Mechanism Content provider Developed Contract Content Provider establishes content checksum in contract Upon receiving content, consumer checks received file with the checksum of the abstraction stored at contract Only the one with access to private key can trigger this Recall msg.sender in Solidity Checksum checking Only gets payed if delivers authentic file Otherwise, Waste of gas, Costly!!! Access Checking done before all this! Right at the request Consumer Full Node
- 21. Protocol - Incentives Napster, As the first decentralized content delivery system, free riding challenge Reputation-based Mechanisms Micropayment Mechanisms Reciprocity Mechanism Capacity Free Bandwidth Transfer Duration Content Size and etc. Lowest Price Offer wins the auction Nash EquilibriumFile Transfer Reverse Auction Reward := Bid
- 22. Protocol – File Transfer Auction First Price Reverse Auction N ≥ 2 Participants Each seller i = 1, · · · , N knows his private cost ci ≥ 0 of production Production costs are independent and identically distributed as a p.d.f. f and c.d.f. F, and have a continuous support J bidding strategy β maps a bidder’s cost ci to a corresponding bid bi Denote the infimum and the supremum of the support J of the cost distribution by č and ĉ, allowing the possibility of ĉ being ∞.
- 23. Part 4. Proof of Concept
- 24. Evaluation – Centralized Architectures Amazon 62% Microsoft Azure 20% Google 12% Other 6% IoT Market Distribution 3923 $ Monthly Amazon Web Service 2447 $ Monthly Microsoft Azure 1443 $ Monthly Google Cloud Platform • Node Assignments • Key Management • Functional Features • IoT Core • Storage • IoT Hub • File Transfer • DDOS Protection • Functional Features • Storage • API • Azure Firewall • Automation • IP Assignment • IoT Hub • DDOS Protection • Storage • Functional Features • API • Bandwidth • Network Traffic Management
- 25. Storage Cost Analysis Storage Cost Finished Updates Demanded Updates _updateOwner Field Maximum Storage Space (Bytes) _updateFileName _updateFileHash _winnerBidderIP _transferPrice _bandWidth 20 1024 256 60 64 64 _price 64 Total: 1536 Total: 1536 Bytes _updateOwner _updateFileName _updateFileHash _timestamp 20 1024 256 256 _initialized 8 Total: 1564 Total: 1564 Bytes
- 26. Functional Cost Analysis Actor Function Gas Price per Execution Cost Per Month (8K transactions - Dollars) Network Owner Instance Contract Finalize Register IoT Device Demand Update Total: 128.874 320000 42000 28223 28351 0.073 76.961 0.006 51.95 Full Node Register Full Node Bid to Update 28415 28287 0.007 51.833 Total: 51.84
- 27. Response Time Analysis (Mili Seconds) 620.22 584.75 681.38 Number of Transactions (Seconds) 8 × 103 4 × 105 6 × 106 3 × 108 4200 6 × 105 8 × 106 16.7916 21.758 74.4197 519.528 15.491 20.58 58.793 382.87 13.41 18.143 51.8362 226.025
- 28. Choosing the device to be updated
- 30. Strengths and Weaknesses Strengths Eliminate Single Point of Failure - Availability Transparency Content Provider in Control of The Content Cost Reduction Weaknesses Cannot prevent or detect hardcopy distribution of Updates High average response time and low throughput (Offchain State Channels / Parachains / Consensus Algorithms) Scalability
- 31. Part 5 – Proof of Concept
Editor's Notes
- #15: Currencies currently used in financial transactions are governed by national governments and in order for blockchain to be widely adopted by financial institutions, agreement has to be reached by the those governments to regulate the use of blockchain, otherwise, its status remains unsettled. Despite the existing security solutions with strong encryption algorithms, cyber security concerns are considered one of the main important factors that affect public’s decisions on sharing personal data using blockchain systems Bugs in software code always exist and poorly written software is especially vulnerable to malicious activity. As software gets more complicated and interconnected, its reliability goes down while the number of bugs goes up. Although we have huge and rapid advancements in technology, software is written by humans and therefore it will always be imperfect. Blockchain is no different. Additionally, the integrity of the software and network are fundamentally important in the evaluation of blockchain as an infrastructure technology. If the technology permeates every major financial system worldwide, the impacts of a glitch or hack could be catastrophic