Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper analyzes the implications of Block Withholding (BWH) attacks in Pay-Per-Share (PPS) and Full-PPS (FPPS) mining schemes, revealing that these models are not incentive compatible as previously claimed. The authors introduce the All-out Attack (AoA) strategy, where an attacker uses its full hashpower to submit only partial Proof-of-Work shares while withholding valid blocks, resulting in significant gains post-difficulty adjustment. Their findings indicate that while the attacker benefits from this strategy, honest miners experience no relative advantage, and the victim pool operator incurs financial losses due to compensating the attacker for pPoW submissions without receiving valid blocks in return.
The All-out Attack strategy reveals that miners can exploit Pay-Per-Share schemes to maximize gains while leaving honest miners and pool operators at a disadvantage.
Classical Block Withholding (BWH) attacks have been extensively studied in block-dependent reward schemes, where pool members are compensated upon a block discovery within the pool. However, most contemporary mining pools operate under share-based scheme wherein participants are paid immediately upon submission of valid shares. In this paper, we analyze BWH under Pay-Per-Share (PPS) and Full-PPS (FPPS) schemes for Nakamoto-style blockchains and prove that these mechanisms are not incentive compatible -- contrary to claims in prior literature. Under PPS/FPPS, the optimal strategy for a BWH attacker is the All-out Attack (AoA): the adversary allocates its entire hashpower toward the victim pool, submitting only partial Proof-of-Work shares (pPoW) while withholding all valid blocks, i.e., full Proof-of-Work (fPoW). Under AoA, prior to the first difficulty adjustment, the adversary incurs negligible loss due to the withheld fPoWs. After the first difficulty adjustment, which reduces block difficulty, the adversary generates more pPoWs per unit time, achieving a relative gain of $\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha}$ compared to pre-adjustment rates, where $\alpha$ is the fraction of adversarial hashpower. Moreover, per unit time and per unit hashpower, all honest miners benefit at the same rate as the adversary. In contrast, the victim pool operator incurs losses: it pays the attacker out-of-pocket for pPoW submissions but receives no fPoW compensation in return. Finally, advanced variants of BWH, such as Fork After Withholding (FAW), do not yield additional profit to the attacker.
