Page 58 - ITU Journal Future and evolving technologies Volume 2 (2021), Issue 1
P. 58

ITU Journal on Future and Evolving Technologies, Volume 2 (2021), Issue 1




          path discloses the channel balance availability for the re‑  problem for the privacy and relationship anonymity be‑
          quested transfer amount to the landmarks. Then land‑  tween the sender and the recipient. To solve that problem
          marks decide on the feasibility of the transaction by do‑  they introduce multi‑hop HTLC contracts. In their non‑
          ing multi‑party computation. During the transfer phase,  blocking approach, Rayo a non‑blocking payment routing,
          when an intermediary node realizes the transaction to  there is a global payment identi ier system that helps the
          the next node, it informs the landmark. Landmarks ac‑  nodes to order the payments with respect to their identi‑
          knowledge the transactions and when all of the transac‑   ier number. For that reason, Rayo is prone to relation‑
          tions are executed on the intended path, the transaction  ship anonymity attacks if the attacker is located on the
          is marked successful. In SilentWhispers, the sender and  payment path. Fulgor aims for guaranteed privacy. The
          the receiver are kept private but the landmarks know the  multi‑hop HTLC contract offered in Fulgor is fully com‑
          sender‑recipient pair. The payment amount is also pri‑  pliant with the Bitcoin scripts. Thus, it is only usable in
          vate for the nodes who do not take part in the transaction.  LN or Bitcoin‑like cryptocurrency backed PCNs. Fulgor’s
          Moreover, the balances of the channels within the net‑  motivation is that in LN the same hash of the pre‑image
          work are kept private. Although centralization is possible,  is distributed on the payment path. This creates a privacy
          the approach is decentralized and landmarks are trusted  problem which by comparing the collected hashes collud‑
          parties.                                             ing nodes can learn about the path of the payment. Ful‑
                                                               gor introduces one more phase of messaging with zero‑
          4.3.5  SpeedyMurmurs                                 knowledge proof‑based communication. The sender dis‑
                                                               tributes unique hashes to the intermediary nodes. It sat‑
          SpeedyMurmurs [10] is a routing protocol, speci ically an  is ies balance privacy, business privacy, sender and recip‑
          improvement for LN. In SpeedyMurmurs, there are well‑  ient anonymity.
          known landmarks like in SilentWhispers. The difference
          of this approach is that the nodes on a candidate path  4.3.8  Bolt
          exchange their neighbors’ information anonymously. So
          if a node is aware of a path closer to the recipient, it  Bolt [12] is a hub‑based payment system. That is, there is
          forwards the payment in that direction, called “shortcut  only one intermediary node between the sender and re‑
          path”. In a shortcut path, an intermediary node does  cipient. Bolt assumes zero‑knowledge proof ‑based cryp‑
          not necessarily know the recipient but knows a neighbor  tocurrencies. It does not satisfy privacy in multi‑hop
          close to the recipient. SpeedyMurmurs hides the identi‑  payments, however, it satis ies very strong relationship
          ties of the sender and the recipient by generating anony‑  anonymity if the intermediary node is honest. On the
          mous addresses for them. Intermediary nodes also hide  other hand, being dependent on a single node makes this
          the identities of their neighbors by generating anony‑  approach a centralized one.
          mous addresses. Although it may be complex, applying
          de‑anonymization attacks on the network will turn it into  4.3.9  Permissioned Bitcoin PCN
          SilentWhispers. This is because, while the algorithm is a
                                                               In PCNs, if the network topology is not ideal, e.g., star
          decentralized approach, with unfair role distribution, it
                                                               topology, some of the nodes may learn about the users
          may turn into a centralized approach.
                                                               and payments. To this end, the authors in [14] propose a
                                                               new topological design for a permissioned PCN such that
          4.3.6  PrivPay
                                                               the channels’ depletion can be prevented. They come up
          PrivPay [11] is a hardware‑oriented version of Silen‑  with a real use case where a consortium of merchants
          tWhispers. The calculations in the landmark are done in  create a full P2P topology and the customers connect to
          tamper‑proof trusted hardware. Hence, the security and  this PCN through merchants which undertakes the  inan‑
          privacy of the network are directly related to the sound‑  cial load of the network to earn money. The privacy of
          ness of the trusted hardware which may also bring cen‑  the users in the PCN is satis ied by LN‑like mechanisms.
          tralization. In PrivPay, sender privacy is not considered.  The authors also investigate how initial channel balances
          Receiver privacy and business volume privacy is achieved  change while the sender/receiver privacy and the rela‑
          by misinformation. When an attacker constantly tries to  tionship anonymity can be satis ied by enforcing at least
          query data from other nodes the framework starts to pro‑  3‑hops in a multi‑hop payment.
          duce probabilistic results.
                                                               4.3.10   Anonymous Multi‑Hop Locks (AMHL)
          4.3.7  Rayo and Fulgor
                                                               In the AMHL proposal [15], the authors offer a new HTLC
          : Rayo and Fulgor [13] are two multi‑hop routing proto‑  mechanism for PCNs. On a payment path, the sender
          cols for PCNs (Fulgor is suitable for LN only). They de‑  agrees to pay a service fee to each of the intermediaries
          velop these protocols against the security  law coming  for their service. However, if two of these intermedi‑
          from hash distribution in LN. Speci ically, the same hash  aries maliciously collude they can eliminate honest users
          of the pre‑image is distributed on the path when a pay‑  in the path and consequently steal their fees. In order to
          ment takes place so the authors argue that this creates a  solve this, they introduce another communication phase





          42                                 © International Telecommunication Union, 2021
   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63