arXiv:2201.07746cs.CR
A Centrality Analysis of the Lightning Network
Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.
Abstract
Payment channel networks (PCNs) such as the Lightning Network offer an appealing solution to the scalability problem faced by many cryptocurrencies operating on a blockchain such as Bitcoin. However, PCNs also inherit the stringent dependability requirements of blockchain. In particular, in order to mitigate liquidity bottlenecks as well as on-path attacks, it is important that payment channel networks maintain a high degree of decentralization. Motivated by this requirement, we conduct an empirical centrality analysis of the popular Lightning Network, and in particular, the betweenness centrality distribution of the routing system. Based on our extensive data set (using several millions of channel update messages), we implemented a TimeMachine tool which enables us to study the network evolution over time. We find that although the network is generally fairly decentralized, a small number of nodes can attract a significant fraction of the transactions, introducing skew. Furthermore, our analysis suggests that over the last two years, the centrality has increased significantly, e.g., the inequality (measured by the Gini index) has increased by more than 10%.
> Bitcoin Lighting Network and Monero ftw. Two things: 1. Bitcoin Lightning is not Bitcoin and is in fact a centralized by design layer 2 system which the transactions are off-chain [0][1], a direct contradiction to what Bitcoin was designed for. A peer-to-peer on-chain…
rvzView on HNParent context