共识算法

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-authority

权威证明[ 编辑]

在基于PoA的网络中，事务和块由经批准的帐户验证，称为验证器。[2]验证器运行软件，允许它们将事务放入块中。该过程是自动化的，不需要验证器持续监控其计算机。但是，它确实需要维护计算机（权限节点[3]）不妥协。该术语由以太坊和Parity Technologies的联合创始人Gavin Wood创造。[4]

使用PoA，个人有权成为验证人，因此有动力保留他们获得的职位。通过将声誉附加到身份上，验证者可以通过激励来维护交易过程，因为他们不希望自己的身份与负面声誉相关联。这被认为比PoS（股权证明）更强大，如：

• 在PoS中，虽然两方之间的股份可能是平等的，但它没有考虑到每一方的总持股量。这意味着激励可能是不平衡的。
• 同时，PoW使用了大量的计算能力，这本身就降低了激励。它也容易受到攻击，因为潜在的攻击者只需要拥有51％的挖掘资源（哈希值）来控制网络，尽管这并不容易。[5]

另一方面，PoA仅允许来自任何一个验证器的非连续块批准，这意味着严重损坏的风险集中在授权节点。

PoA适用于私有网络和公共网络，如POA网络，其中信任是分布式的。[3]

建立权威[ 编辑]

确定验证器必须满足的三个主要条件是：

1. 必须在链上正式验证身份，并且可以在公共可用域中交叉检查信息
2. 必须难以获得资格，才能获得验证所获得和重视的区块的权利。（例如：潜在的验证人需要获得公证书）
3. 建立权力机构的检查和程序必须完全统一

比较[ 编辑]

主要文章：验证的工作和验证的股权

• 该验证的工作（POW）一致使用挖掘机构，其中的行动纲领没有。[6]
• 的验证的桩（POS）机构的工作原理使用，其选择参与者赌注最高为验证，假设最高利益相关者诱因，以确保一个事务处理的算法。PoW通过验证在执行事务之前已完成工作（挖掘）来工作。[3]
• 同时，PoA使用身份作为验证权限的唯一验证，这意味着不需要使用挖掘。
• 委托的股权证明（DPoS）使用生成块的证人工作。证人由利益攸关方选出，每名证人每人一票。但是，对于PoA，权限的任命是自动的，这意味着不平等的赌注不会产生任何偏见或不平衡的过程。[7] 在PoA中，验证者需要通过DApps正式验证其身份，并在公共领域提供此身份信息，供所有人交叉引用。[8]
• 由于PoA安全性以权威节点的形式集中，许多PoA批评者想到使用区块链来实现这种用法 - 说明PoA区块链并非真正分散，简单的DB会更高效，更快，且具有成本效益。

示例[ 编辑]

• Parity支持以太坊网络上的PoA声明。
• POA网络[9]
• Kovan是以太坊测试网，在PoA上运行[10]
• 该VeChain blockchain将运行使用行动纲领达成共识模型[11] 。

=====================================================================-=====

Proof-of-authority[edit]

In PoA-based networks, transactions and blocks are validated by approved accounts, known as validators.[2] Validators run software allowing them to put transactions in blocks. The process is automated and does not require validators to be constantly monitoring their computers. It, however, does require maintaining the computer (the authority node[3]) uncompromised. The term was coined by Gavin Wood, co-founder of Ethereum and Parity Technologies.[4]

With PoA, individuals earn the right to become validators, so there is an incentive to retain the position that they have gained. By attaching a reputation to identity, validators are incentivized to uphold the transaction process, as they do not wish to have their identities attached to a negative reputation. This is considered more robust than PoS (proof-of-stake), as:

• In PoS, while a stake between two parties may be even, it does not take into account each party’s total holdings. This means that incentives can be unbalanced.
• Meanwhile, PoW uses an enormous amount of computing power, which, in itself lowers incentive. It is also vulnerable to attack, as a potential attacker would only need to have 51% of the mining resources (hashrate) to control a network, although this is not easy to do.[5]

On the other hand, PoA only allows non-consecutive block approval from any one validator, meaning that the risk of serious damage is centralized to the authority node.

PoA is suited for both private networks and public networks, like POA Network, where trust is distributed.[3]

Establishing authority[edit]

The three main conditions that must be fulfilled for a validator to be established are:

1. Identity must be formally verified on-chain, with a possibility to cross-check the information in a publicly available domain
2. Eligibility must be difficult to obtain, to make the right to validate the blocks earned and valued. (Example: potential validators are required to obtain public notary license)
3. There must be complete uniformity in the checks and procedures for establishing an authority

Comparisons[edit]

Main articles: Proof-of-work and Proof-of-stake

• The proof-of-work (PoW) consensus uses a mining mechanism, where PoA does not.[6]
• The proof-of-stake (PoS) mechanism works using an algorithm that selects participants with the highest stakes as validators, assuming that the highest stakeholders are incentivized to ensure a transaction is processed. PoW works by verifying that work (mining) has been done before transactions are carried out.[3]
• Meanwhile, PoA uses identity as the sole verification of the authority to validate, meaning that there is no need to use mining.
• Delegated proof-of-stake (DPoS) works using witnesses, who generate blocks. Witnesses are elected by stakeholders at a rate of one vote per share per witness. However, with PoA, the appointment of an authority is automatic, meaning that there can be no bias or uneven process caused by unequal stakes.[7] In PoA, validators need to have their identity verified formally via DApps, and have this identity information available in the public domain for everyone to cross-reference.[8]
• Since PoA security is centralized in the form of the authority node, a lot of PoA critics wonder the point of using a blockchain for this kind of usages - stating that PoA blockchains are not really decentralized and a simple DB would be more efficient, faster, and cost effective.

Examples[edit]

• Parity supports PoA claims on the Ethereum network.
• POA Network[9]
• Kovan is an Ethereum testnet, that runs on PoA[10]
• The VeChain blockchain will run using a PoA consensus model[11].