Irrationality, Extortion, or Trusted Third-parties: Why it is Impossible to Buy and Sell Physical Goods Securely on the Blockchain

A. K. Goharshady
{"title":"Irrationality, Extortion, or Trusted Third-parties: Why it is Impossible to Buy and Sell Physical Goods Securely on the Blockchain","authors":"A. K. Goharshady","doi":"10.1109/Blockchain53845.2021.00021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Suppose that Alice plans to buy a physical good from Bob over a programmable Blockchain. Alice does not trust Bob, so she is not willing to pay before the good is delivered off-chain. Similarly, Bob does not trust Alice, so he is not willing to deliver the good before getting paid on-chain. Moreover, they are not inclined to use the services of a trusted third-party. Traditionally, such scenarios are handled by game-theoretic escrow smart contracts, such as BitHalo. In this work, we first show that the common method for this problem suffers from a major flaw which can be exploited by Bob in order to extort Alice. We also show that, unlike the case of auctions, this flaw cannot be addressed by a commitment-scheme-based approach. We then provide a much more general result: assuming that the two sides are rational actors and the smart contract language is Turing-complete, there is no escrow smart contract that can facilitate this exchange without either relying on third parties or enabling at least one side to extort the other.**A preprint of this work appeared in [1].","PeriodicalId":372721,"journal":{"name":"2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2021 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/Blockchain53845.2021.00021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Suppose that Alice plans to buy a physical good from Bob over a programmable Blockchain. Alice does not trust Bob, so she is not willing to pay before the good is delivered off-chain. Similarly, Bob does not trust Alice, so he is not willing to deliver the good before getting paid on-chain. Moreover, they are not inclined to use the services of a trusted third-party. Traditionally, such scenarios are handled by game-theoretic escrow smart contracts, such as BitHalo. In this work, we first show that the common method for this problem suffers from a major flaw which can be exploited by Bob in order to extort Alice. We also show that, unlike the case of auctions, this flaw cannot be addressed by a commitment-scheme-based approach. We then provide a much more general result: assuming that the two sides are rational actors and the smart contract language is Turing-complete, there is no escrow smart contract that can facilitate this exchange without either relying on third parties or enabling at least one side to extort the other.**A preprint of this work appeared in [1].
非理性、勒索或可信第三方:为什么不可能在区块链上安全地买卖实物商品
假设Alice计划通过可编程区块链从Bob那里购买实物商品。Alice不信任Bob,所以她不愿意在货物下线之前付款。同样,Bob不信任Alice,所以他不愿意在链上支付之前交付货物。此外,他们不倾向于使用可信第三方的服务。传统上,这种情况是由博弈论的托管智能合约处理的,比如BitHalo。在这项工作中,我们首先证明了这个问题的通用方法存在一个重大缺陷,鲍勃可以利用这个缺陷来勒索爱丽丝。我们还表明,与拍卖的情况不同,这一缺陷不能通过基于承诺计划的方法来解决。然后,我们提供了一个更一般的结果:假设双方都是理性的参与者,并且智能合约语言是图灵完备的,那么在不依赖第三方或至少允许一方勒索另一方的情况下,没有托管智能合约可以促进这种交换。**本作品的预印本见于[1]。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信