survey

Public Access

Security and Privacy on Blockchain

Authors:

Rui Zhang,

Rui Xue,

Ling LiuAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), Volume 52, Issue 3

Article No.: 51, Pages 1 - 34

https://doi.org/10.1145/3316481

Published: 03 July 2019 Publication History

All formats PDF

Abstract

Blockchain offers an innovative approach to storing information, executing transactions, performing functions, and establishing trust in an open environment. Many consider blockchain as a technology breakthrough for cryptography and cybersecurity, with use cases ranging from globally deployed cryptocurrency systems like Bitcoin, to smart contracts, smart grids over the Internet of Things, and so forth. Although blockchain has received growing interests in both academia and industry in the recent years, the security and privacy of blockchains continue to be at the center of the debate when deploying blockchain in different applications. This article presents a comprehensive overview of the security and privacy of blockchain. To facilitate the discussion, we first introduce the notion of blockchains and its utility in the context of Bitcoin-like online transactions. Then, we describe the basic security properties that are supported as the essential requirements and building blocks for Bitcoin-like cryptocurrency systems, followed by presenting the additional security and privacy properties that are desired in many blockchain applications. Finally, we review the security and privacy techniques for achieving these security properties in blockchain-based systems, including representative consensus algorithms, hash chained storage, mixing protocols, anonymous signatures, non-interactive zero-knowledge proof, and so forth. We conjecture that this survey can help readers to gain an in-depth understanding of the security and privacy of blockchain with respect to concept, attributes, techniques, and systems.

References

[1]

{n.d.}. Bitcoin—Open source P2P money. Retrieved from https://bitcoin.org/en.

Google Scholar

[2]

{n.d.}. Ethereum Project. Retrieved from https://www.ethereum.org.

Google Scholar

[3]

{n.d.}. IBM Blockchain based on Hyperledger Fabric from the Linux Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.ibm.com/blockchain/hyperledger.html.

Google Scholar

[4]

{n.d.}. PlatON. Retrieved from https://www.platon.network/#/.

Google Scholar

[5]

{n.d.}. Monero. Retrieved from http://www.getmonero.org.

Google Scholar

[6]

{n.d.}. What is BitShares. Retrieved from http://docs.bitshares.org/bitshares/whatis.html.

Google Scholar

[7]

2017. Steem: An incentivized, blockchain-based, public content platform.

Google Scholar

[8]

2017. ZooKeeper: A Distributed Coordination Service for Distributed Applications.

Google Scholar

[9]

Aigents. 2017. Proof of Reputation as Liquid Democracy for Blockchain.

Google Scholar

[10]

Marcin Andrychowicz, Stefan Dziembowski, Daniel Malinowski, and Lukasz Mazurek. {n.d.}. Secure multiparty computations on bitcoin. In SP 2014. 443--458.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[11]

Kristov Atlas. {n.d.}. CoinJoin Sudoku: Weaknesses in SharedCoin.

Google Scholar

[12]

Kristov Atlas. 2014. Weak Privacy Guarantees for SharedCoin Mixing Service.

Google Scholar

[13]

Adam Back. 2002. Hashcash—A denial of service counter-measure. In USENIX Technical Conference.

Google Scholar

[14]

Dave Bayer, Stuart Haber, and W. Scott Stornetta. 1993. Improving the Efficiency and Reliability of Digital Time-Stamping. 329--334.

Google Scholar

[15]

Juan Benet. 2015. IPFS—Content Addressed, Versioned, P2P File System (DRAFT 3).

Google Scholar

[16]

Nir Bitansky, Ran Canetti, Alessandro Chiesa, and Eran Tromer. {n.d.}. From extractable collision resistance to succinct non-interactive arguments of knowledge, and back again. In ITCS 2012. 326--349.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[17]

Nir Bitansky, Alessandro Chiesa, Yuval Ishai, Omer Paneth, and Rafail Ostrovsky. {n.d.}. Succinct non-interactive arguments via linear interactive proofs. In TCC 2013. 315--333.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[18]

Manuel Blum, Paul Feldman, and Silvio Micali. {n.d.}. Non-interactive Zero-knowledge and its applications. In STOC 1988. 103--112.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[19]

Peter Bogetoft, Dan Lund Christensen, Ivan Damgård, Martin Geisler, Thomas P. Jakobsen, Mikkel Krøigaard, Janus Dam Nielsen, Jesper Buus Nielsen, Kurt Nielsen, Jakob Pagter, Michael I. Schwartzbach, and Tomas Toft. {n.d.}. Secure multiparty computation goes live. In FC 2009. 325--343.

Google Scholar

[20]

J. Bonneau, A. Miller, J. Clark, A. Narayanan, J. A. Kroll, and E. W. Felten. {n.d.}. SoK: Research perspectives and challenges for bitcoin and cryptocurrencies. In SP 2015. 104--121.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[21]

Joseph Bonneau, Arvind Narayanan, Andrew Miller, Jeremy Clark, Joshua A. Kroll, and Edward W. Felten. {n.d.}. Mixcoin: Anonymity for Bitcoin with Accountable Mixes. 486--504.

Google Scholar

[22]

Daniel R. L. Brown. 2000. The Exact Security of ECDSA. Technical Report. Advances in Elliptic Curve Cryptography.

Google Scholar

[23]

Vitalik Buterin. {n.d.}. Ethereum’s White Paper: A Next-Generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform.

Google Scholar

[24]

Rebecca Campbell. 2017. Delaware Passes Groundbreaking Blockchain Regulation Bill.

Google Scholar

[25]

Miguel Castro and Barbara Liskov. {n.d.}. Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In OSDI 1999. 173--186.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[26]

Melissa Chase. {n.d.}. Multi-authority Attribute Based Encryption. 515--534.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[27]

David Chaum and Eugène van Heyst. {n.d.}. Group Signatures. 257--265.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[28]

Lin Chen, Lei Xu, Nolan Shah, Zhimin Gao, Yang Lu, and Weidong Shi. 2017. On security analysis of proof-of-elapsed-time (PoET). In Stabilization, Safety, and Security of Distributed Systems. 282--297.

Google Scholar

[29]

Raymond Cheng, Fan Zhang, Jernej Kos, Warren He, Nicholas Hynes, Noah M. Johnson, Ari Juels, Andrew Miller, and Dawn Song. 2018. Ekiden: A platform for confidentiality-preserving, trustworthy, and performant smart contract execution. CoRR abs/1804.05141 (2018).

Google Scholar

[30]

Coindesk. 2017. State of Blockchian - Q4 2017.

Google Scholar

[31]

Nxt community. 2014. Nxt Whitepaper.

Google Scholar

[32]

Mauro Conti, Sandeep Kumar E., Chhagan Lal, and Sushmita Ruj. 2017. A survey on security and privacy issues of Bitcoin. CoRR abs/1706.00916 (2017).

Google Scholar

[33]

Henry Corrigan-Gibbs and Bryan Ford. {n.d.}. Dissent: Accountable Anonymous Group Messaging. 340--350.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[34]

Phil Daian, Rafael Pass, and Elaine Shi. 2016. Snow White: Provably Secure Proofs of Stake. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2016/919.

Google Scholar

[35]

Jules DuPont and Anna Cinzia Squicciarini. {n.d.}. Toward De-Anonymizing Bitcoin by mapping users location. In CODASPY 2015. 139--141.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[36]

Cynthia Dwork, Moni Naor, and Amit Sahai. {n.d.}. Concurrent zero-knowledge. In STOC 1998. 409--418.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[37]

Taher ElGamal. {n.d.}. A Public Key Cryptosystem and a Signature Scheme Based on Discrete Logarithms. 10--18.

Google Scholar

[38]

Fangyu Gai, Baosheng Wang, Wenping Deng, and Wei Peng. 2018. Proof of reputation: A reputation-based consensus protocol for peer-to-peer network. In Database Systems for Advanced Applications. 666--681.

Google Scholar

[39]

Juan Garay, Aggelos Kiayias, and Nikos Leonardos. 2015. The Bitcoin backbone protocol: Analysis and applications. In EUROCRYPT 2015. 281--310.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[40]

Sanjam Garg, Craig Gentry, Shai Halevi, Amit Sahai, and Brent Waters. {n.d.}. Attribute-Based Encryption for Circuits from Multilinear Maps. 479--499.

Google Scholar

[41]

Craig Gentry. {n.d.}. Fully homomorphic encryption using ideal lattices. In STOC 2009. 169--178.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[42]

Yossi Gilad, Rotem Hemo, Silvio Micali, Georgios Vlachos, and Nickolai Zeldovich. 2017. Algorand: Scaling Byzantine Agreements for Cryptocurrencies. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2017/454.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[43]

Seth Gilbert and Nancy Lynch. 2002. Brewer’s conjecture and the feasibility of consistent, available, partition-tolerant web services. SIGACT News 33, 2 (June 2002), 5--59.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[44]

GoChain. 2018. Proof of Reputation.

Google Scholar

[45]

Oded Goldreich, Silvio Micali, and Avi Wigderson. {n.d.}. How to play any mental game or A completeness theorem for protocols with honest majority. In STOC 1987. 218--229.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[46]

S. Goldwasser, S. Micali, and C. Rackoff. {n.d.}. The knowledge complexity of interactive proof-systems. In STOC 1985. 291--304.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[47]

Sergey Gorbunov, Vinod Vaikuntanathan, and Hoeteck Wee. {n.d.}. Attribute-based encryption for circuits. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2013). 545--554.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[48]

Jens Groth. {n.d.}. Short Pairing-Based Non-interactive Zero-Knowledge Arguments. 321--340.

Google Scholar

[49]

Stuart Haber and W. Scott Stornetta. 1991. How to time-stamp a digital document. J. Cryptology 3, 2 (1991), 99--111.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[50]

Intel. 2017. Sawtooth Lake. Retrieved from https://intelledger.github.io/.

Google Scholar

[51]

Don Johnson, Alfred Menezes, and Scott Vanstone. 2001. The elliptic curve digital signature algorithm (ECDSA). Int. J. Inf. Secur. 1, 1 (2001), 36--63.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[52]

T. Jung, X. Y. Li, Z. Wan, and M. Wan. {n.d.}. Privacy preserving cloud data access with multi-authorities. In INFOCOM 2013. 2625--2633.

Crossref

Google Scholar

[53]

Harry Kalodner, Steven Goldfeder, Xiaoqi Chen, S. Matthew Weinberg, and Edward W. Felten. {n.d.}. Arbitrum: Scalable, private smart contracts. In USENIX Security 2018. 1353--1370.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[54]

Ghassan Karame. {n.d.}. On the security and scalability of Bitcoin’s Blockchain. In CCS 2016. 1861--1862.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[55]

Aggelos Kiayias, Alexander Russell, Bernardo David, and Roman Oliynykov. {n.d.}. Ouroboros: A Provably Secure Proof-of-Stake Blockchain Protocol. 357--388.

Google Scholar

[56]

Sunny King and Scott Nadal. 2012. PPCoin: Peer-to-peer crypto-currency with proof-of-stake. (2012).

Google Scholar

[57]

Protocol Labs. 2017. Filecoin: A Decentralized Storage Network.

Google Scholar

[58]

Leslie Lamport. 2016. Paxos made simple. ACM Sigact News 32, 4 (2016).

Google Scholar

[59]

Leslie Lamport, Robert Shostak, and Marshall Pease. {n.d.}. The byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst. 4, 3 ({n. d.}), 382--401.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[60]

Allison Lewko and Brent Waters. {n.d.}. Decentralizing attribute-based encryption. In EUROCRYPT 2011. 568--588.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[61]

Xiaoqi Li, Peng Jiang, Ting Chen, Xiapu Luo, and Qiaoyan Wen. 2017. A survey on the security of blockchain systems. Future Generation Computer Systems (2017).

Google Scholar

[62]

Gregory Maxwell. 2013. CoinJoin: Bitcoin privacy for the real world. Retrieved from bitcointalk.org.

Google Scholar

[63]

Mindi McDowell. 2013. Understanding Denial-of-Service Attacks.

Google Scholar

[64]

Sarah Meiklejohn, Marjori Pomarole, Grant Jordan, Kirill Levchenko, Damon McCoy, Geoffrey M. Voelker, and Stefan Savage. {n.d.}. A fistful of Bitcoins: Characterizing payments among men with no names. In IMC 2013. 127--140.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[65]

Andrew Miller, Yu Xia, Kyle Croman, Elaine Shi, and Dawn Song. {n.d.}. The honey badger of BFT protocols. In CCS 2016. 31--42.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[66]

H. Moniz, N. F. Neves, M. Correia, and P. Verissimo. {n.d.}. Experimental comparison of local and shared coin randomized consensus protocols. In SRDS 2006. 235--244.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[67]

Satoshi Nakamoto. 2008. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Retrieved from www.bitcoin.org, 9. (2008).

Google Scholar

[68]

Arvind Narayanan, Joseph Bonneau, Edward Felten, Andrew Miller, and Steven Goldfeder. 2016. Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies: A Comprehensive Introduction.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[69]

SAFE Network. 2018. A SAFE Network Primer—An Introductory guide to the world’s first fully autonomous data network.

Google Scholar

[70]

Diego Ongaro and John Ousterhout. {n.d.}. In search of an understandable consensus algorithm. In USENIX ATC 2014. 305--320.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[71]

Pascal Paillier. {n.d.}. Public-key cryptosystems based on composite degree residuosity classes. In EUROCRYPT 1999. 223--238.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[72]

Rafael Pass, Lior Seeman, and Abhi Shelat. {n.d.}. Analysis of the Blockchain Protocol in Asynchronous Networks. 643--673.

Google Scholar

[73]

Rafael Pass and Elaine Shi. {n.d.}. FruitChains: A fair Blockchain. In PODC 2017. 315--324.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[74]

Rafael Pass and Elaine Shi. 2016. The Sleepy Model of Consensus. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2016/918.

Google Scholar

[75]

M. Pease, R. Shostak, and L. Lamport. {n.d.}. Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. J. ACM 27, 2 ({n. d.}), 228--234.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[76]

Andrea Pinna and Wiebe Ruttenberg. 2016. Distributed ledger technologies in securities post-trading.

Google Scholar

[77]

R. L. Rivest, A. Shamir, and L. Adleman. {n.d.}. A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems. Commun. ACM 21, 2 ({n. d.}), 120--126.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[78]

Ronald L. Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Yael Tauman. {n.d.}. How to Leak a Secret. 552--565.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[79]

Tim Ruffing, Pedro Moreno-Sanchez, and Aniket Kate. {n.d.}. CoinShuffle: Practical Decentralized Coin Mixing for Bitcoin. 345--364.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[80]

Nicolas van Saberhagen, Johannes Meier, Antonio M. Juarez, and Max Jameson. 2012. CryptoNote Signatures.

Google Scholar

[81]

Amit Sahai and Brent Waters. {n.d.}. Fuzzy Identity-Based Encryption. 457--473.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[82]

Eli Ben Sasson, Alessandro Chiesa, Christina Garman, Matthew Green, Ian Miers, Eran Tromer, and Madars Virza. {n.d.}. Zerocash: Decentralized anonymous payments from Bitcoin. In SP 2014. 459--474.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[83]

Emin Gün Sirer. {n.d.}. Hacking, Distributed.

Google Scholar

[84]

Emin Gün Sirer. 2016. Bitcoin Guarantees Strong, Not Eventual, Consistency.

Google Scholar

[85]

China Blockchain Technology and Industry Development Forum. 2016. China Blockchain Technology and Application Development White Paper.

Google Scholar

[86]

Jason Teutsch and Christian Reitwießner. 2017. TrueBit: A scalable verification solution for blockchains.

Google Scholar

[87]

Marten van Dijk, Craig Gentry, Shai Halevi, and Vinod Vaikuntanathan. {n.d.}. Fully homomorphic encryption over the integers. In EUROCRYPT 2010. 24--43.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[88]

Pavel Vasin. 2018. BlackCoin’s Proof-of-Stake Protocol v2.

Google Scholar

[89]

Werner Vogels. {n.d.}. Eventually consistent. Commun. ACM 52, 1 ({n. d.}), 40--44.

Google Scholar

[90]

Mark Walport. 2016. Distributed ledger technology: Beyond block chain.

Google Scholar

[91]

Roger Wattenhofer. 2016. The Science of the Blockchain (1st ed.). CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[92]

Wikipedia. {n.d.}. Proof-of-authority. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proof-of-authority.

Google Scholar

[93]

Shawn Wilkinson, Tome Boshevski, Josh Brandof, James Prestwich, Gordon Hall, Patrick Gerbes, Philip Hutchins, and Chris Pollard. {n.d.}. Storj: A Peer-to-Peer Cloud Storage Network.

Google Scholar

[94]

A. C. Yao. {n.d.}. Protocols for secure computations. In SFCS 1982. 160--164.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[95]

Andrew Chi-Chih Yao. {n.d.}. How to generate and exchange secrets. In SFCS 1986. 162--167.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

[96]

Guy Zyskind, Oz Nathan, and Alex Pentland. 2015. Enigma: Decentralized computation platform with guaranteed privacy. Comput. Sci. (2015).

Google Scholar

[97]

Christian Decker, Jochen Seidel, and Roger Wattenhofer. 2016. Bitcoin meets strong consistency. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Distributed Computing and Networking (ICDCN’16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 13, 10 pages.

Digital Library

Google Scholar

Cited By

View all

Hosseini Bamakan SBanaeian Far S(2025)Distributed and trustworthy digital twin platform based on blockchain and Web3 technologiesCyber Security and Applications10.1016/j.csa.2024.1000643(100064)Online publication date: Dec-2025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csa.2024.100064
Agustin NParreno NMorante BDadan R(2024)Effects of Cryptocurrency Vulnerabilities on the International Trading ArenaEuropean Modern Studies Journal10.59573/emsj.8(1).2024.248:1(269-281)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.59573/emsj.8(1).2024.24
(2024)AI Applications in Analysing and Predicting Cryptocurrency MarketRecent trends in Management and Commerce10.46632/rmc/5/2/85:2(42-46)Online publication date: 13-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.46632/rmc/5/2/8
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Security and Privacy on Blockchain
1. Security and privacy
  1. Security services
    1. Privacy-preserving protocols
  2. Systems security
    1. Distributed systems security

Recommendations

Blockchain Survey for Security and Privacy in the e-Health Ecosystem
Risks and Security of Internet and Systems
Abstract
This survey paper focuses on the use of blockchain technology to ensure security and privacy properties in e-health applications. For that, background information on blockchain technology was conducted, followed by a classification of e-health ...
A review of IoT security and privacy using decentralized blockchain techniques
Abstract
IoT security is one of the prominent issues that has gained significant attention among the researchers in recent times. The recent advancements in IoT introduces various critical security issues and increases the risk of privacy leakage of IoT ...
Three-tier Storage Framework Based on TBchain and IPFS for Protecting IoT Security and Privacy
Recently, most of the Internet of things (IoT) infrastructures are highly centralized with single points of failure, which results in serious security and privacy issues of IoT data. Fortunately, blockchain technique can provide a decentralized and secure ...

Reviews

Reviewer: Phoram Mehta

While still controversial in terms of mainstream use, the study, research, and development of all things blockchain has been moving ahead full steam. Interestingly, while distributed ledger technology (DLT) is intrinsically perceived to be more secure than traditional client-server and n -tiered architectures, the desire to study these aspects in detail have been rising as commercial use cases rise beyond cryptocurrency. This paper, a survey of existing blockchain security and privacy attributes and attacks, while focused on Bitcoin-like systems, is a good reference for other DLT applications. The authors also propose additional security and privacy properties that developers of new DLT applications may desire. Primarily, due to a lack of non-cryptocurrency blockchain-based applications, the authors stick to comparing Bitcoin-like systems to explain the threats, techniques, and procedures for the security and privacy attributes identified. However, they do add a high-level analysis of proposed attributes for current DLT applications based on cryptographic components like "consensus algorithms, hash chained storage, mixing protocols, anonymous signatures, [and] non-interactive zero-knowledge proof[s]." What sets this paper apart from many other security and privacy analyses of blockchain systems is its focus on individual properties rather than the application as a whole. In assuming familiarity with cryptocurrency applications based on DLT, the authors succeed in furthering the discussion and research on advanced security and privacy aspirations for semi-private distributed systems. As a supplementary reference, the paper also includes basic descriptions of blockchain concepts, inherent security attributes in blockchain systems, and consensus algorithms.

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Become a reviewer for Computing Reviews.

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

ACM Computing Surveys Volume 52, Issue 3

May 2020

734 pages

ISSN:0360-0300

EISSN:1557-7341

DOI:10.1145/3341324

Editor:
Sartaj Sahni
Department of Computer and Information Science and Engineering

Issue’s Table of Contents

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 03 July 2019

Accepted: 01 February 2019

Revised: 01 January 2019

Received: 01 May 2018

Published in CSUR Volume 52, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Survey
Research
Refereed

Funding Sources

National Natural Science Foundation of China
National Science Foundation
National Key R&D Program of China

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

592
Total Citations
View Citations
33,563
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)8,694
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)644

Reflects downloads up to 09 Aug 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

Hosseini Bamakan SBanaeian Far S(2025)Distributed and trustworthy digital twin platform based on blockchain and Web3 technologiesCyber Security and Applications10.1016/j.csa.2024.1000643(100064)Online publication date: Dec-2025
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csa.2024.100064
Agustin NParreno NMorante BDadan R(2024)Effects of Cryptocurrency Vulnerabilities on the International Trading ArenaEuropean Modern Studies Journal10.59573/emsj.8(1).2024.248:1(269-281)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.59573/emsj.8(1).2024.24
(2024)AI Applications in Analysing and Predicting Cryptocurrency MarketRecent trends in Management and Commerce10.46632/rmc/5/2/85:2(42-46)Online publication date: 13-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.46632/rmc/5/2/8
Meskini FAlaoui YAboulaich R(2024)Evaluating Barriers to Blockchain Adoption in the Insurance Sector using Interval-Valued Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSISWSEAS TRANSACTIONS ON BUSINESS AND ECONOMICS10.37394/23207.2024.21.12921(1584-1597)Online publication date: 12-Jul-2024
https://doi.org/10.37394/23207.2024.21.129
Cholevas CAngeli ESereti ZMavrikos ETsekouras G(2024)Anomaly Detection in Blockchain Networks Using Unsupervised Learning: A SurveyAlgorithms10.3390/a1705020117:5(201)Online publication date: 9-May-2024
https://doi.org/10.3390/a17050201
Qasim ABilal MMunawar ARehman Baig S(2024)Blockchain based intrusion detection in agent-driven flight operationsMultiagent and Grid Systems10.3233/MGS-24001720:2(161-183)Online publication date: 12-Aug-2024
https://doi.org/10.3233/MGS-240017
Andryushin S(2024)Tokenization of real assets: classification, platforms, applications, opportunities and challenges of developmentRussian Journal of Economics and Law10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.88-10418:1(88-104)Online publication date: 18-Mar-2024
https://doi.org/10.21202/2782-2923.2024.1.88-104
Giamberardino GGadda TNagalli A(2024)Using blockchain technology for sustainable public procurement of road worksRevista de Administração Pública10.1590/0034-761220230073x58:3Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220230073x
Giamberardino GGadda TNagalli A(2024)Uso da tecnologia blockchain nas contratações públicas sustentáveis de obras rodoviáriasRevista de Administração Pública10.1590/0034-76122023007358:3Online publication date: 2024
https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-761220230073
Dobrianskyi BStetsenko I(2024)Architectural framework for a United Blockchain Interaction LibraryPROBLEMS IN PROGRAMMING10.15407/pp2024.01.086(86-95)Online publication date: Jan-2024
https://doi.org/10.15407/pp2024.01.086
Show More Cited By

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Get Access

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Abstract

References

Cited By

Index Terms

Recommendations

Blockchain Survey for Security and Privacy in the e-Health Ecosystem

A review of IoT security and privacy using decentralized blockchain techniques

Three-tier Storage Framework Based on TBchain and IPFS for Protecting IoT Security and Privacy

Reviews

Access critical reviews of Computing literature here

Comments

Information

Published In

Publisher

Publication History

Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View options

PDF

eReader

HTML Format

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Figures

Other

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media

Affiliations