Data availability

资讯 2024-07-09 阅读:76 评论:0
w最後編輯: @wackerow(opens in a new tab), 2024年5月7日在本頁面PrerequisitesThe data availability problemData availability solutions...
美化布局示例

欧易(OKX)最新版本

【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   全球官网 大陆官网

币安(Binance)最新版本

币安交易所app【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址

火币HTX最新版本

火币老牌交易所【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址

最後編輯: @wackerow(opens in a new tab), 2024年5月7日

"Don't trust, verify" is a common maxim in Ethereum. The idea is that your node can independently verify that the information it receives is correct by executing all the transactions in the blocks they receive from peers to ensure that the changes proposed precisely match those computed independently by the node. This means nodes do not have to trust that the senders of the block are honest. This is not possible if data is missing.

Data availability refers to the confidence a user can have that the data required to verify a block is really available to all network participants. For full nodes on Ethereum layer 1 this is relatively simple; the full node downloads a copy of all the data in each block - the data has to be available for the downloading to be possible. A block with missing data would be discarded rather than being added to the blockchain. This is "on chain data availability" and it is a feature of monolithic blockchains. Full nodes cannot be tricked into accepting invalid transactions because they download and execute every transaction for themselves. However, for modular blockchains, layer 2 rollups and light clients, the data availability landscape is more complex, requiring some more sophisticated verification procedures.

You should have a good understanding of blockchain fundamentals, especially consensus mechanisms. This page also assumes the reader is familiar with blocks, transactions, nodes, scaling solutions, and other relevant topics.

The data availability problem is the need to prove to the whole network that the summarized form of some transaction data that is being added to the blockchain really represents a set of valid transactions, but doing so without requiring all nodes to download all data. The full transaction data is necessary for independently verifying blocks, but requiring all nodes to download all transaction data is a barrier to scaling. Solutions to the data availability problem aim to provide sufficient assurances that the full transaction data was made available for verification to network participants that do not download and store the data for themselves.

Light nodes and Layer 2 rollups are important examples of network participants that require strong data availability assurances but cannot download and process transaction data for themselves. Avoiding downloading transaction data is what makes light nodes light and enables rollups to be effective scaling solutions.

Data availability is also a critical concern for future "stateless" Ethereum clients that do not need to download and store state data in order to verify blocks. The stateless clients still need to be certain that the data is available somewhere and that it has been processed correctly.

Data Availability Sampling (DAS) is a way for the network to check that data is available without putting too much strain on any individual node. Each node (including non-staking nodes) downloads some small, randomly selected subset of the total data. Successfully downloading the samples confirms with high confidence that all of the data is available. This relies upon data erasure coding, which expands a given dataset with redundant information (the way this is done is to fit a function known as a polynomial over the data and evaluating that polynomial at additional points). This allows the original data to be recovered from the redundant data when necessary. A consequence of this data creation is that if any of the original data is unavailable, half of the expanded data will be missing! The amount of data samples downloaded by each node can be tuned so that it is extremely likely that at least one of the data fragments sampled by each client will be missing if less than half the data is really available.

DAS will be used to ensure rollup operators make their transaction data available after Full Danksharding has been implemented. Ethereum nodes will randomly sample the transaction data provided in blobs using the redundancy scheme explained above to ensure that all the data exists. The same technique could also be employed to ensure block producers are making all their data available to secure light clients. Similarly, under proposer-builder separation, only the block builder would be required to process an entire block - other validators would verify using data availability sampling.

Data Availability Committees (DACs) are trusted parties that provide, or attest to, data availability. DACs can be used instead of, or in combination with(opens in a new tab) DAS. The security guarantees that come with committees depends on the specific set up. Ethereum uses randomly sampled subsets of validators to attest to data availability for light nodes, for example.

DACs are also used by some validiums. The DAC is a trusted set of nodes that stores copies of data offline. The DAC is required to make the data available in the event of a dispute. Members of the DAC also publish on-chain attestations to prove that the said data is indeed available. Some validiums replace DACs with a proof-of-stake (PoS) validator system. Here, anyone can become a validator and store data off-chain. However, they must provide a “bond”, which is deposited in a smart contract. In the event of malicious behavior, such as the validator withholding data, the bond can be slashed. Proof-of-stake data availability committees are considerably more secure than regular DACs because they directly incentivize honest behavior.

Light nodes need to validate the correctness of the block headers they receive without downloading the block data. The cost of this lightness is the inability to independently verify the block headers by re-executing transactions locally in the way full nodes do.

Ethereum light nodes trust random sets of 512 validators that have been assigned to a sync committee. The sync committee acts as a DAC that signals to light clients that the data in the header is correct using a cryptographic signature. Every day, the sync committee refreshes. Each block header alerts light nodes as to which validators to expect to sign off the next block, so they can't be tricked into trusting a malicious group pretending to be the real sync-committee.

However, what happens if an attacker somehow does manage to pass a malicious block header to light clients and convince them that it was signed off by an honest sync-committee? In that case, the attacker could include invalid transactions and the light client would blindly accept them, as they do not independently check all the state changes summarized in the block header. To protect against this, the light client could use fraud proofs.

The way these fraud proofs work is that a full node, seeing an invalid state transition being gossiped around the network, could quickly generate a small piece of data demonstrating that a proposed state transition could not possibly arise from a given set of transactions and broadcast that data to peers. Light nodes could pick up those fraud-proofs and use them to discard bad block headers, ensuring they stay on the same honest chain as the full nodes.

This relies on full nodes having access to full transaction data. An attacker who broadcasts a bad block header and also fails to make the transaction data available would be able to prevent full nodes from generating fraud proofs. The full nodes might be able to signal a warning about a bad block, but they couldn't back up their warning with proof, because the data wasn't made available to generate the proof from!

The solution to this data availability problem is DAS. Light nodes download very small random chunks of the full state data and use the samples to verify that the full data set is available. The actual likelihood of incorrectly assuming full data availability after downloading N random chunks can be calculated (for 100 chunks the chance is 10^-30(opens in a new tab), i.e. incredibly unlikely).

Even in this scenario, attacks that withhold just a few bytes could feasibly go unnoticed by clients making random data requests. Erasure coding fixes this by reconstructing small missing pieces of data that can be used to check proposed state changes. A fraud proof could then be constructed using the reconstructed data, preventing light nodes from accepting bad headers.

Note: DAS and fraud proofs have not yet been implemented for proof-of-stake Ethereum light clients, but they are on the roadmap, most likely taking the form of ZK-SNARK based proofs. Today's light clients rely on a form of DAC: they verify the identities of the sync-committee and then trust the signed block headers they receive.

Layer 2 scaling solutions, such as , reduce transaction costs and increase Ethereum's throughput by processing transactions off-chain. Rollup transactions are compressed and posted on Ethereum in batches. Batches represent thousands of individual off-chain transactions in a single transaction on Ethereum. This reduces congestion on the base layer and reduces fees for users.

However, it is only possible to trust the 'summary' transactions posted to Ethereum if the state change proposed can be independently verified and confirmed to be the result of applying all the individual off-chain transactions. If rollup operators do not make the transaction data available for this verification, then they could send incorrect data to Ethereum.

Optimistic rollups post compressed transaction data to Ethereum and wait for some amount of time (typically 7 days) to allow independent verifiers to check the data. If anyone identifies a problem, they can generate a fraud-proof and use it to challenge the rollup. This would cause the chain to roll back and omit the invalid block. This is only possible if data is available. Currently, there are two ways that optimistic rollups post transaction data to L1. Some rollups make data permanently available as which lives permanently on-chain. With the implementation of EIP-4844, some rollups post their transaction data to cheaper blob storage instead. This is not permanent storage. Independent verifiers have to query the blobs and raise their challenges within ~18 days before the data is deleted from Ethereum layer-1. Data availability is only guaranteed by the Ethereum protocol for that short fixed window. After that, it becomes the responsibility of other entities in the Ethereum ecosystem. Any node can verify data availability using DAS, i.e. by downloading small, random samples of the blob data.

Zero-knowledge (ZK) rollups don't need to post transaction data since guarantee the correctness of state transitions. However, data availability is still an issue because we can't guarantee the functionality of the ZK-rollup (or interact with it) without access to its state data. For example, users cannot know their balances if an operator withholds details about the rollup’s state. Also, they cannot perform state updates using information contained in a newly added block.

Data availability is different from data retrievability. Data availability is the assurance that full nodes have been able to access and verify the full set of transactions associated with a specific block. It does not necessarily follow that the data is accessible forever.

Data retrievability is the ability of nodes to retrieve historical information from the blockchain. This historical data is not needed for verifying new blocks, it is only required for syncing full nodes from the genesis block or serving specific historical requests.

The core Ethereum protocol is primarily concerned with data availability, not data retrievability. Data retrievability can be provided by a small population of archive nodes run by third parties, or it can be distributed across the network using decentralized file storage such as the Portal Network(opens in a new tab).

美化布局示例

欧易(OKX)最新版本

【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   全球官网 大陆官网

币安(Binance)最新版本

币安交易所app【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址

火币HTX最新版本

火币老牌交易所【遇到注册下载问题请加文章最下面的客服微信】永久享受返佣20%手续费!

APP下载   官网地址
文字格式和图片示例

注册有任何问题请添加 微信:MVIP619 拉你进入群

弹窗与图片大小一致 文章转载注明

分享:

扫一扫在手机阅读、分享本文

发表评论
平台列表
美化布局示例

欧易(OKX)

  全球官网 大陆官网

币安(Binance)

  官网

火币(HTX)

  官网

Gate.io

  官网

Bitget

  官网

deepcoin

  官网
热门文章
  • 支付領域投下震撼彈!美國數位銀行Chime疑與GuardPay 神盾支付合作!

    支付領域投下震撼彈!美國數位銀行Chime疑與GuardPay 神盾支付合作!
    2020年,新冠肺炎(COVID-19)疫情加速數位貨幣進展。例如:2019年4月,國際清算銀行(BIS)的調查顯示,在全球66家中央銀行中,沒有一家計畫發行跨境支付的數位貨幣。惟到了2020年10月,BIS支付委員會主席康利夫(Jon Cunliffe)指出,肺炎疫情拉高民眾對無現金支付的需求,迫使各國加快數位貨幣的研發進程日本與韓國於2021年進入數位貨幣試驗階段。直到2019年12月,美國聯邦準備理事會(Fed)都尚無數位貨幣規劃,惟到了2020年2月,Fed已開始研擬...
  • 区块链:交易系统开发指南

    区块链:交易系统开发指南
    播报编辑《区块链:交易系统开发指南》使用通俗易懂的语言,从技术的角度详细介绍了区块链交易系统应有的功能架构及工作原理,让人们能够张开双臂轻松地拥抱区块链技术,享受区块链交易系统带来的惊喜与成就感。《区块链:交易系统开发指南》共分 7 章,第 1~2 章主要介绍区块链及数字货币的基本概念,以及各种公有链的 API 接口;第3~5 章主要介绍区块链交易系统的分类架构及功能; 6 章主要介绍区块链交易系统面临的问题及演进方向;第 7 章对全书做了总结。《区块链:交易系统开发指南》是...
  • 5.14加密货币价格:BTC突破6.2万美元以太坊和山寨币反映市场情绪

    5.14加密货币价格:BTC突破6.2万美元以太坊和山寨币反映市场情绪
    今天,随着比特币(BTC)的价格突破62 000美元的门槛,顶级加密货币的价格反弹了。 此外,以铁大幅上涨,维持在2 900美元的水平。 此外,其他顶尖山硬币,如索拉纳(SOL )、XRP、卡达诺(ADA )也大幅上涨。    今天密钥加密货币价格 1. 比特币价格    在5月14日星期二撰写本文时,比特币价格上升了2.57%,达到62 487.50美元。 另一方面,在过去24小时内,交易量从65.26 % 急剧上升至277亿美元。 与此同时,加密货币的市场价值为...
  • OKEx回应用户质疑:合约交易非期货 平台无机器人

    OKEx回应用户质疑:合约交易非期货 平台无机器人
       热点点 自选股份 数据中心 数据中心 研究和资料中心 资金流动 模拟交易 客户客户 具体来说,OKEx回答用户的问题:合同交易不是期货,平台不是机器人。 金融同步化,3月22日。    昨天下午,OKEx公司就维护先前用户线下的权利问题对同步财务公司作出了回应,指出OKEx公司提供的合同交易不是期货交易,在旗下的业务中没有正式的机器人。 同时,OKEX称,它不会以非法为由对任何投资损失索赔作出答复。 答复全文如下: 同步你的财务! 近日来,...
  • 0.00006694个比特币等于多少人民币/美金

    0.00006694个比特币等于多少人民币/美金
    0.00006694比特币等于多少人民币?根据比特币对人民币的最新汇率,0.00006694比特币等于4.53424784美元/32.5436 16人民币。比特币(BTC)美元(USDT)人民币(CNY)0.000066944.53424784【比特币密码】32.82795436 16比特币对人民币的最新汇率为:490408.64 CNY(1比特币=490408.64人民币)(1美元=7.24人民币)(0.00006694USDT=0.0004846456 CNY)汇率更新时...
标签列表