|
|
|
Security |
|
|
|
|
Data is only shared between parties involved in the transaction, verifiers, and permissioned observers. This allows an extra layer of security from traditional DLT where the data is spread throughout the network.
|
SGX / PoET
All transactions are signed by known identities.
PoET implementation will depend on that of SGX. SGX is a set of instructions which allows application to run in sectioned-off areas of memory called enclaves. This aims to protect sensitive data and code from disclosure or tampering, both when stored and at runtime. Unfortunately, since Intel first introduced SGX in 2013, several weaknesses have been found in its design.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/02/01/sgx_secure_until_you_look_at_the_detail/
|
No data encryption or channel partition and is public.
Merkle Patricia Trie Data structure
Data and contracts in Ethereum are encoded but not encrypted and all data is public - therefore all sensitive data should be encrypted locally and hash stored to prove authenticity.
|
|
|
|
Permissioned
|
Permissioned, Permissionless depending on application
Hyperledger Sawtooth supports both permissioned and permissionless blockchain networks. This provides flexibility but lacks the prescriptive level of security hyperledger fabric has.
|
Permissionless
Anyone can download the protocol and validate transactions making it less secure
|
|
|
|
Privacy concerns are addressed through the pluggable uniqueness services, and restriction of viewing transactions.
|
Configrable permissions for any node cluster within the network
Sawtooth is built to solve the challenges of permissioned (private) networks. Clusters of Sawtooth nodes can be easily deployed with separate permissioning. There is no centralized service that could potentially leak transaction patterns or other confidential information. There is no concept of private channels as seen with Hyperledger fabric
contributors are investigating both trusted execution and zero-knowledge cryptographic approaches
|
Limited (zk-SNARKs, Ring signatures)
Privacy in this public permissionless network has been limited. Since the Metropolis hard fork, it became possible to integrate more cryptographic operations in smart contracts - two kinds of technologies are implemented: zk-SNARKs and Ring Signatures.
‘Zero-knowledge’ proofs allow one party (the prover) to prove to another (the verifier) that a statement is true, without revealing any information beyond the validity of the statement itself.
Ring Signatures are a cryptographic technology first introduced in 2001. It enables any member of a group of users to perform a digital signature, that can be proven to be made by a member of this group, while it is impossible to determine by which member of the group.
https://btcmanager.com/good-news-privacy-bitcoin-ethereum/
|
|
|
|
Algorithms |
|
|
|
|
Notaries - Pluggable Framework, Validity consensus and Uniqueness consensus
transaction validity and transaction uniqueness.
https://docs.corda.net/key-concepts-consensus.html
Corda uses special Notary Nodes to reach consensus. Notaries are nodes that specifically address double spend attempts.
|
PoET
Dynamic, Pluggable Consensus Algorithms
Sawtooth supports pluggable consensus algorithms but offers their own method —Proof of Elapsed Time (PoET). The PoET consensus has each validating participant wait a random amount of time. The first person to finish waiting becomes the leader of the new block. This provides a secure authority mechanism without the computational race and energy draw of Proof of Work (PoW).
|
PoW & PoS
Proof of work (PoW) + PoS-based public blockchains in Ethereums upcoming Casper implementation. Opposed to the PoW consensus protocol, the PoS protocol achieves consensus through stakers, sometimes referred to as minters who “stake” their coins by locking them down in specialized wallets. With stakers at work, mining will become redundant, meaning the Ethereum network post-Casper will rely on stakers and staking pools instead of miners for its operability.
|
|
|
|
Efficiency |
|
|
|
|
Fast
Built for financial applications
|
Fast
Depends on implementation. Processes transactions in parallel to accelerate block creation and validation
|
Moderate
|
|
|
Block Confirmation Time
Details
|
TBD
|
Varies
Depends on implementation. Processes transactions in parallel to accelerate block creation and validation
|
~12 blocks
|
|
|
|
Development |
|
|
|
Proprietary Codebase
Details
|
Open Source
|
Open Source
|
Open Source
https://github.com/ethereum/
|
|
|
|
General |
|
|
|
Blockchain / DLT type
Details
|
Not a blockchain. Uses DLT to create transaction efficiencies between permissioned parties rather than the same ledger for the entire network, which R3 Corda believes is inefficient.
https://vimeo.com/205410473
|
Federated / Consortium, Permissioned Network
Federated Blockchains operate under the leadership of a group. As opposed to public Blockchains, they don’t allow any person with access to the Internet to participate in the process of verifying transactions. Federated Blockchains are faster (higher scalability) and provide more transaction privacy - important aspects for Enterprise focused deployments
|
Public with Private Forks
Ethereum can be a public or private blockchain. The Ethereum Main network is obviously a public blockchain, but with increasing enterprise-focus a number of projects and consortiums (Ethereum Aliiance) have been launched that develop private blockchains (e.g. Quorum)
|
|
|
|
Less focus on modularity
Focus is on financial applications, but may support more use cases in the future.
|
Modular Architecture. Incorporates IoT Sensors that can broaden the use case.
Location, Temperature, Humidity, Shock, Tilt, Motion, Shock - all examples of data that can be captured.
|
Generic, with DApp and Smart Contract support for wider applications
For Ethereum it is not modularity that stands out but the provision of a generic platform suitable for various types of transactions and applications
|
|
|
|
Corda focuses on scaling through reducing inefficiencies in consensus mechanisms. By limiting involvement to just the transacting parties, beneficiaries, and verifiers it aims to position itself as more scalable than PoW
performance considerations https://www.corda.net/2017/12/dlt-performance-considerations/
|
1000 TPS. Built to be scalable in the way that consensus algorithms can be changed, applications are separate from the core system, and transactions can occur in parallel.
The different consensus mechanism features were designed to cater to networks of different sizes and with different requirements. Sawtooth targets large distributed validator populations that do not require much computational power.
|
limited by PoW
currently supports a maximum of 15 TPS
designed for public networks, limited by Proof of Work (PoW) consensus
|
|
|
|
Varies
|
Varies
Depends on implementation
|
Varies
https://bitinfocharts.com/comparison/size-eth.html#3m
|
