Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2309.11317

Lazy Contracts: Alleviating High Gas Costs by Secure and Trustless Off-chain Execution of Smart Contracts

Soroush Farokhnia
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Smart contracts are programs that are executed on the blockchain and can hold, manage and transfer assets in the form of cryptocurrencies. The contract's execution is then performed on-chain and is subject to consensus, i.e. every node on the blockchain network has to run the function calls and keep track of their side-effects. In most programmable blockchains, such as Ethereum, the notion of gas is introduced to prevent DoS attacks by malicious parties who might try to slow down the network by performing heavy computations. A fixed cost to each atomic operation, and the initiator of a function call pays the total gas cost as a transaction fee. This helps prevent DoS attacks, but the resulting fees are extremely high. For example, in 2022, on Ethereum alone, there has been a total gas usage of 1.77 Million ETH ~ 4.3 Billion USD. This thesis proposes "lazy contracts" as a solution to alleviate these costs. Our solution moves most of the computation off-chain, ensuring that each function call incurs only a tiny amount of gas usage, while preserving enough data on-chain to guarantee an implicit consensus about the state of the contract variables and ownership of funds. A complete on-chain execution of the functions will only be triggered in case two parties to the contract are in disagreement about the current state, which in turn can only happen if at least one party is dishonest. In such cases, our protocol can identify the dishonest party and penalize them by having them pay for the entire gas usage. Hence, no rational party has an incentive to act dishonestly. Finally, we perform extensive experiments over 160,735 real-world Solidity contracts that were involved in 9,055,492 transactions in January 2022--January 2023 on Ethereum and show that our approach reduces the overall gas usage by 55.4%, which amounts to an astounding saving of 109.9 Million USD in gas fees.

Explore related subjects

cs.CR

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Soroush Farokhnia. 2023-09-20. Lazy Contracts: Alleviating High Gas Costs by Secure and Trustless Off-chain Execution of Smart Contracts. https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.11317

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

WAInjectBench: Benchmarking Prompt Injection Detections for Web Agents

Multiple prompt injection attacks have been proposed against web agents. At the same time, various methods have been developed to detect general prompt injection attacks, but none have been systematically evaluated for web agents. In this work, we bridge this gap by presenting the first comprehensive benchmark study on detecting prompt injection attacks targeting web agents. We begin by introducing a fine-grained categorization of such attacks based on the threat model. We then construct datasets containing both malicious and benign samples: malicious text segments generated by different attacks, benign text segments from four categories, malicious images produced by attacks, and benign images from two categories. Next, we systematize both text-based and image-based detection methods. Finally, we evaluate their performance across multiple scenarios. Our key findings show that while some detectors can identify attacks that rely on explicit textual instructions or visible image perturbations with moderate to high accuracy, they largely fail against attacks that omit explicit instructions or employ imperceptible perturbations. Our datasets and code are released at: https://github.com/Norrrrrrr-lyn/WAInjectBench.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

MIRANDA: short signatures from a leakage-free full-domain-hash scheme

We present $\mathsf{Miranda}$, the first family of full-domain-hash signatures based on matrix codes. This signature scheme fulfils the paradigm of Gentry, Peikert and Vaikuntanathan ($\mathsf{GPV}$), which gives strong security guarantees. Our trapdoor is very simple and generic: if we propose it with matrix codes, it can actually be instantiated in many other ways since it only involves a subcode of a decodable code (or lattice) in a unique decoding regime of parameters. Though $\mathsf{Miranda}$ signing algorithm relies on a decoding task where there is exactly one solution, there are many possible signatures given a message to sign and we ensure that signatures are not leaking information on their underlying trapdoor by means of a very simple procedure involving the drawing of a small number of uniform bits. In particular $\mathsf{Miranda}$ does not use a rejection sampling procedure which makes its implementation a very simple task contrary to other $\mathsf{GPV}$-like signatures schemes such as $\mathsf{Falcon}$ or even $\mathsf{Wave}$. We instantiate $\mathsf{Miranda}$ with the famous family of Gabidulin codes represented as spaces of matrices and we study thoroughly its security (in the EUF-CMA security model). For~$128$ bits of classical security, the signature sizes are as low as~$90$ bytes and the public key sizes are in the order of~$2.6$ megabytes.

cs.CR↗
arXiv2026

The Role of Learning in Attacking ML-based Network Intrusion Detection

Machine Learning-based Network Intrusion Detection Systems (ML-NIDS) can be bypassed by rudimentary adversarial perturbations. Recent work has focused on identifying where such perturbations can realistically be applied by a host-side adversary. Yet every one of these attacks produces perturbations the same way: searching from scratch for every flow. The cost of an attack therefore grows in lockstep with the number of flows it must perturb, and real networks produce them by the tens of millions. In this paper, we show that using reinforcement learning to train lightweight perturbation-generating policies lets an adversary amortize that cost across flows it perturbs. Counting every detector query and every second an attack spends, training included, we compare learned policies against gradient, query-based, and random search across six ML-NIDS environments at two operating points, under both evasion and alert inflation. One successful adversarial example costs a learned policy 1.5 to 18 detector queries against 52 to 1,100 for the strongest search baseline, and the policy amortizes its training cost after 76 to 1,622 examples, a volume a monitored link produces in seconds of traffic. We further find that the RL formulation literature adopts by default is unnecessary for evasion, that the policy conditions on the flow it is given rather than converging on a fixed perturbation, and that it transfers to detectors and traffic it never trained against. The value of learning to attack ML-NIDS is therefore not a matter of effectiveness, but of scale.

cs.CR↗