Advertisement

Short Paper: An Exploration of Code Diversity in the Cryptocurrency Landscape

  • Pierre Reibel
  • Haaroon Yousaf
  • Sarah MeiklejohnEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11598)

Abstract

Interest in cryptocurrencies has skyrocketed since their introduction a decade ago, with hundreds of billions of dollars now invested across a landscape of thousands of different cryptocurrencies. While there is significant diversity, there is also a significant number of scams as people seek to exploit the current popularity. In this paper, we seek to identify the extent of innovation in the cryptocurrency landscape using the open-source repositories associated with each one. Among other findings, we observe that while many cryptocurrencies are largely unchanged copies of Bitcoin, the use of Ethereum as a platform has enabled the deployment of cryptocurrencies with more diverse functionalities.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors were supported in part by EPSRC Grant EP/N028104/1 and in part by the EU H2020 TITANIUM project under grant agreement number 740558.

References

  1. 1.
    Apostolaki, M., Zohar, A., Vanbever, L.: Hijacking Bitcoin: routing attacks on cryptocurrencies. In: 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, San Jose, CA, USA, 22–26 May 2017, pp. 375–392. IEEE Computer Society Press (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Azouvi, S., Maller, M., Meiklejohn, S.: Egalitarian society or benevolent dictatorship: the state of cryptocurrency governance. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Bitcoin and Blockchain Research (2018)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bartoletti, M., Carta, S., Cimoli, T., Saia, R.: Dissecting Ponzi schemes on Ethereum: identification, analysis, and impact (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biryukov, A., Khovratovich, D., Pustogarov, I.: Deanonymisation of clients in Bitcoin P2P network. In: Ahn, G.-J., Yung, M., Li, N. (eds.) ACM CCS 2014, Scottsdale, AZ, USA, 3–7 November 2014, pp. 15–29. ACM Press (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bos, J.W., Halderman, J.A., Heninger, N., Moore, J., Naehrig, M., Wustrow, E.: Elliptic curve cryptography in practice. In: Christin, N., Safavi-Naini, R. (eds.) FC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8437, pp. 157–175. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45472-5_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, W., Zheng, Z., Cui, J., Ngai, E., Zheng, P., Zhou, Y.: Detecting Ponzi schemes on Ethereum: towards healthier blockchain technology. In: Proceedings of the 2018 World Wide Web Conference (WWW) (2018)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    David, B., Gaži, P., Kiayias, A., Russell, A.: Ouroboros praos: an adaptively-secure, semi-synchronous proof-of-stake blockchain. In: Nielsen, J.B., Rijmen, V. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 2018, Part II. LNCS, vol. 10821, pp. 66–98. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78375-8_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donet, J.A.D., Pérez-Solà, C., Herrera-Joancomartí, J.: The Bitcoin P2P network. In: Böhme, R., Brenner, M., Moore, T., Smith, M. (eds.) FC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8438, pp. 87–102. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44774-1_7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eyal, I., Gencer, A.E., Sirer, E.G., van Renesse, R.: Bitcoin-ng: a scalable blockchain protocol. In: Proceedings of NSDI 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gencer, A.E., Basu, S., Eyal, I., Renesse, R.V., Sirer, E.G.: Decentralization in Bitcoin and Ethereum networks. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (FC) (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gervais, A., Karame, G.O., Wüst, K., Glykantzis, V., Ritzdorf, H., Capkun, S.: On the security and performance of proof of work blockchains. In: Weippl, E.R., Katzenbeisser, S., Kruegel, C., Myers, A.C., Halevi, S. (eds.) ACM CCS 2016, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 October 2016, pp. 3–16. ACM Press (2016)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hu, Y., Zhang, J., Bai, X., Yu, S., Yang, Z.: Influence analysis of GitHub repositories. SpringerPlus 5(1), 1268 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Huang, D.Y., Levchenko, K., Snoeren, A.C.: Measuring profitability of alternative crypto-currencies. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security (FC) (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kappos, G., Yousaf, H., Maller, M., Meiklejohn, S.: An empirical analysis of anonymity in Zcash. In: Proceedings of the USENIX Security Symposium (2018)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kiayias, A., Russell, A., David, B., Oliynykov, R.: Ouroboros: a provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In: Katz, J., Shacham, H. (eds.) CRYPTO 2017, Part I. LNCS, vol. 10401, pp. 357–388. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63688-7_12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kogias, E.K., Jovanovic, P., Gailly, N., Khoffi, I., Gasser, L., Ford, B.: Enhancing Bitcoin security and performance with strong consistency via collective signing. In: Proceedings of USENIX Security 2016 (2016)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kokoris-Kogias, E., Jovanovic, P., Gasser, L., Gailly, N., Ford, B.: Omniledger: a secure, scale-out, decentralized ledger. In: Proceedings of the 39th IEEE Symposium on Security & Privacy (2018)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Koshy, P., Koshy, D., McDaniel, P.: An analysis of anonymity in Bitcoin using P2P network traffic. In: Christin, N., Safavi-Naini, R. (eds.) FC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8437, pp. 469–485. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45472-5_30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luu, L., Narayanan, V., Zheng, C., Baweja, K., Gilbert, S., Saxena, P.: A secure sharding protocol for open blockchains. In: Weippl, E.R., Katzenbeisser, S., Kruegel, C., Myers, A.C., Halevi, S. (eds.) ACM CCS 2016, Vienna, Austria, 24–28 October 2016, pp. 17–30. ACM Press (2016)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Meiklejohn, S., et al.: A fistful of bitcoins: characterizing payments among men with no names. In: Proceedings of the 2013 Internet Measurement Conference (IMC), pp. 127–140 (2013)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Moore, T., Christin, N.: Beware the middleman: empirical analysis of Bitcoin-exchange risk. In: Sadeghi, A.-R. (ed.) FC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7859, pp. 25–33. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39884-1_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Möser, M., et al.: An empirical analysis of linkability in the Monero blockchain. Proc. Privacy Enhancing Technol. 2016(3), 143–163 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system (2008). bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf
  24. 24.
    Ray, B., Posnett, D., Filkov, V., Devanbu, P.: A large scale study of programming languages and code quality in GitHub. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGSOFT International Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering (FSE), pp. 155–165 (2014)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Reid, F., Harrigan, M.: An analysis of anonymity in the Bitcoin system. In: Altshuler, Y., Elovici, Y., Cremers, A., Aharony, N., Pentland, A. (eds.) Security and Privacy in Social Networks, pp. 197–223. Springer, New York (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4139-7_10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ron, D., Shamir, A.: Quantitative analysis of the full Bitcoin transaction graph. In: Sadeghi, A.-R. (ed.) FC 2013. LNCS, vol. 7859, pp. 6–24. Springer, Heidelberg (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39884-1_2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Spagnuolo, M., Maggi, F., Zanero, S.: BitIodine: extracting intelligence from the Bitcoin network. In: Christin, N., Safavi-Naini, R. (eds.) FC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8437, pp. 457–468. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-45472-5_29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Syta, E., et al.: Keeping authorities “honest or bust” with decentralized witness cosigning. In: 2016 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, San Jose, CA, USA, 22–26 May 2016, pp. 526–545. IEEE Computer Society Press (2016)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thung, F., Bissyandé, T.F., Lo, D., Jiang, L.: Network structure of social coding in GitHub. In: Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Software Maintenance and Reengineering (2013)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vasek, M., Bonneau, J., Castellucci, R., Keith, C., Moore, T.: The Bitcoin brain drain: examining the use and abuse of Bitcoin brain wallets. In: Grossklags, J., Preneel, B. (eds.) FC 2016. LNCS, vol. 9603, pp. 609–618. Springer, Heidelberg (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-54970-4_36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Vasek, M., Moore, T.: There’s no free lunch, even using Bitcoin: tracking the popularity and profits of virtual currency scams. In: Böhme, R., Okamoto, T. (eds.) FC 2015. LNCS, vol. 8975, pp. 44–61. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-47854-7_4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vasek, M., Moore, T.: Analyzing the Bitcoin Ponzi scheme ecosystem. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Bitcoin and Blockchain Research (2018)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Vasek, M., Thornton, M., Moore, T.: Empirical analysis of denial-of-service attacks in the Bitcoin ecosystem. In: Böhme, R., Brenner, M., Moore, T., Smith, M. (eds.) FC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8438, pp. 57–71. Springer, Heidelberg (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44774-1_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zhu, J., Zhou, M., Mockus, A.: Patterns of folder use and project popularity: a case study of Github repositories. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE International Symposium on Empirical Software Engineering and Measurement (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© International Financial Cryptography Association 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pierre Reibel
    • 1
  • Haaroon Yousaf
    • 1
  • Sarah Meiklejohn
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.University College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations