Sybil Attack Prevention Making Accounts and Markets using SFT


#1

We need to protect the network against Sybil attacks for the feature of making accounts and marketplace titles. It is my idea that instead of burning SFT we use the lockin feature where someone can lock in their SFT -> spit out an account or title market; then after some interval of blocks those SFT get unlocked and can then be used for making accounts or go towards incentives again.


Safex Development Update - March 18, 2019
#2

Good idea. Could the amount needed be dynamically pegged to a fiat price or market transaction volume?
1k to 10k SFT may seem reasonable now but may be way too much in the future when the SFT price is higher. The lock-in time could be some days maybe.


#3

I think the interval of blocks would need to be a decent period of time to prevent Sybil attacks, otherwise you could just keep recycling the same tokens to open more and more accounts. I’m concerned that if there is no ‘cost’ to creating an account, then the reputation system will be compromised. Perhaps in this case, the cost is the period of time the tokens are locked.


#4

Exactly! Even if it’s a month it should be ok. As long as you get it back eventually. If you really have to pay for account opening and don’t get anything back this may scare off potential users.

You could also build in a function that it unlocks after you bought/sold something.


#5

We will model it out, how many accounts can be created over time versus the interval and the token requirement to create the account/title market.

Furthermore, the value of reputation is to build it up, not throw your account away. It is incredibly expensive to grow reputation. Besides paying a fee in SFX and locking in SFT to make that account. It is pretty much useless.

What if I have a high value item shop that only trades with 5 star users with minimum 50 successful trades.


#6

I was under the impression that creating accounts and title markets burned SFT rather than locked them in, did that change or was it always intended they would just be locked in and unlocked later for reuse?

@cryptooli maybe SFT/BTC would be a good price peg. that should incorporate all fiat currencies to some degree and also account for fluctuations in the hype/depression crypto cycles when prices can get wonky.


#7

The burn of SFT was considered first but temporarily locking the tokens is better. The supply is “only” 2 billion SFT. If you think very long term, a substantial amount of SFT would be lost via burns in the process of millions of accounts and title markets created after mass adoption.


#8

Good idea.

Seems it was suggested early on, so great to see this improvement to the project