Hindawi

Complexity
Volume 2022, Article ID 5835457, 15 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/5835457

Research Article
Technology and Security Analysis of Cryptocurrency
Based on Blockchain

Chao Yu,1 Wenke Yang ,2,3 Feiyu Xie,1 and Jianmin He2
1
School of Cyber Science and Engineering, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China
2
School of Economics and Management, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China
3
Department of Management, Strategy and Innovation, Faculty of Economics and Business, KU Leuven, Warmoesberg 26,
Brussels 1000, Belgium

Correspondence should be addressed to Wenke Yang; wenkedyang@gmail.com

Received 26 April 2022; Accepted 4 July 2022; Published 21 July 2022

Academic Editor: Yi Su

Copyright © 2022 Chao Yu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Blockchain technology applied to cryptocurrencies is the dominant factor in maintaining the security of cryptocurrencies. This
article reviews the technological implementation of cryptocurrency and the security and stability of cryptocurrency and analyzes
the security support from blockchain technology and its platforms based on empirical case studies. Our results show that the
security support from blockchain technology platforms is significantly insufficient and immature. In addition, we further Zyskind
and Nathan (2015) and Choi (2019) and find that the top ten platforms play critical roles in security support and have significant
advantages in terms of funds, duration, and human resources. Moreover, these platforms provide computational resources and
benefits to the consensus algorithm selection for blockchain practitioners. Second, encryption ensures the security of crypto-
currencies. On the one hand, the digital signatures identify the identity of the signatory and the transaction. However, the
principle of the hash algorithm (SHA256) confirms ownership. Meanwhile, SHA256 is infeasible to compute in the reverse
direction and is difficult to attack. Furthermore, the records in the blockchain can be queried by every participant, making the
system information transparent and open reliable. Third, compared to the study of Fu and Fang 2016, we find that the blockchain
structure is composed of security components and basic components of six layers that are independent and cannot be extended
completely and have a certain coupling among them. Fourth, the underlying ledger structures of Bitcoin and DAG are highly
correlated to their security. Specifically, we follow Sompolinsky et al. (2016) and detect that the structure of SPECTRE ensures
network security and robustness from its block production, conflict resolution, and generated trusted transaction sets. Meanwhile,
the voting algorithm of SPECTRE makes resolving conflicting transactions by calculating votes and ensuring the transaction
information that is virtually unable to be tampered with possible. In particular, the security calculation power of SPECTRE can
reach 51% and resist “double-spend attacks” and “censorship attacks” effectively. In addition, the RDL framework of SPECTRE
achieves security confirmation of transferring funds. Moreover, PHANTOM identifies evil blocks by employing block con-
nectivity analysis and ensures its security. Eventually, we also expand the studies of (Sompolinsky et al., 2016 and Sompolinsky
et al., 2017) and compare the basic characteristics of the protocols of Bitcoin, SPECTRE, and PHANTOM and find that protocols
play imperative roles throughout the implementation process of cryptocurrency. In addition, the underlying ledger structure and
consensus mechanism make up a blockchain while the confirmation time, throughput limit, and ordering are prerequisites for
smart contracts.

1. Introduction novices in trading operations, and has gradually been ap-

plied in the financial sector [1–3]. Cryptocurrencies are
Cryptocurrency, owing to its rarity and ability to prevent diverse owing to various distinct cryptocurrency protocols
overabundance and inflation, has drawn a large number of [4]. In 2021, the market contains over five thousand tokens
speculators, including those with trading experience and of different cryptocurrencies, even though most of them are
2 Complexity

not in demand because of their poor capitalization and the forged. On the other hand, the private key can generate a
same technic as their predecessors. Specifically, consider that signature of messages that cannot be denied by the signer. In
the first five cryptocurrencies, Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum addition, the private key is devoted to managing and pro-
(ETH), Tether (USDT), Cardano (ADA), and Binance Coin tecting cryptocurrencies. Nevertheless, most cryptocurrency
(BNB), hold 45.81%, 17.11%, 4.16%, 3%, and 2.9% of the users are unable to execute with technical enterprises on
global cryptocurrency market capitalization, respectively, complex plans, which makes them over-extended and
adding up to approximately 81.5%, which can be used as underachieved on technical execution, and even have a
proxies for cryptocurrencies. It is noteworthy that Tether higher probability of losing their private keys than external
(USDT) and Cardano (ADA) have replaced the status of adversaries. Furthermore, the role of the hash function was
Ripple (XRP) and Litecoin (LTC). In addition, the appli- limited.
cation fields of cryptocurrencies generate differences [4, 5].
Hence, we may conclude that cryptocurrencies and
However, their application fields are mainly determined by
blockchain technology have developed rapidly in the past 13
protocols for cryptocurrency. Additionally, the majority of
years. However, their development has also generated var-
these cryptocurrencies exploit protocols, even though there
ious kinds of security issues, such as the trust, risk, and
are other database structures.
efficiency of cryptocurrency, which has not been fully
The underlying technology behind cryptocurrencies is
considered to maintain robust functioning financial systems.
blockchain, which is treated as an immutable distributed
Therefore, making a detailed analysis of the technology and
ledger. Blockchain technology has been portrayed as the
security of cryptocurrency is increasingly indispensable for
“next-generation Internet” and “new foundational tech-
the development of financial systems. The main reasons are
nology” [6]. In addition, compared to traditional state-
indicated as follows: first, trust cannot solely rely on the code
sponsored currencies, cryptocurrency may have the ability
base for the loophole in the code, which can turn it to be a
to perform microtransactions and then solve the economic
legitimate action and allowable within the code [7].
gap. However, the application of blockchain technology,
Meanwhile, the trust and acceptance of users are generated
such as many cryptocurrencies that are distributed auton-
by the value of cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin continue to
omous organizations (DAOs) and based on the top of
exist, which indicates that trust and acceptance may di-
blockchain infrastructures, is characterized as “Ponzi
minish when their values are gone [1]. Second, significant
schemes.” Blockchain technology is the single most dis-
risks can be generated by all encoded contractual agreements
ruptive to financial and economic systems [1]. Therefore,
and organizational relationships on the blockchain. There-
future blockchain applications and technology adoption will
fore, trust issues in transactions generate risks. Third,
be wildly jeopardized [7].
cryptocurrency improves financial efficiency and makes
Additionally, current blockchain technology platforms
digital transactions widespread [6, 7]. For international
are chaotic and have difficulties in achieving consensus,
transactions, cryptocurrencies can quickly respond to
coordinating actions, and resolving differences [8]. As
emergency transaction needs through peer-to-peer systems.
shown in Figure 1, although the overall growth trend of
Then, the efficiency of cryptocurrency would be greatly
blockchain technology platforms is exponential and grows
enhanced once trust issues are resolved. For example,
rapidly from 2012 to 2019 with an average growth rate of
cryptocurrency markets have high liquidity and are evolving
55.08%, the growth rate has dropped significantly from 2019
[12]. Thus, three research questions are addressed in this
to 2021. Blockchain infrastructures have not been operated
study:
by an official organization or a physical and legal entity [9].
Blockchain is generally regarded as a distributed data- (a) What is the status quo of the security and stability of
base system and managed by a peer-to-peer network of cryptocurrencies in terms of support from block-
computing devices, which helps provide a shared, yet ac- chain technology platforms and blockchain
curate record [10]. For instance, blockchain-inspired tech- technology?
nology was recently adopted to describe distributed ledger (b) What is the relationship between blockchain tech-
technology, such as Corda, which was developed by R3. nology and the security of cryptocurrency?
According to Nakamoto [11], blockchain can be defined as a
(c) How do maintain and what are the differences be-
peer-to-peer electronic cash system. In particular, traditional
tween the security and stability of cryptocurrencies?
organizational functions are replaced by encoded and exe-
cuted on the blockchain through distributed autonomous In this article, we present a detailed analysis of the se-
organizations (DAOs). Blockchains contain different gov- curity and stability of cryptocurrencies in terms of support
erning principles and parameters, and they have similar data from blockchain technology platforms and blockchain
structures and distributed architectures. Blockchains secure technology. As many of the presented issues are related to
the database and protect it from external attacks or malicious the financial market, this work falls in the more general
behaviors by cryptography, such as public or private key security area in data authenticity and recording, and the
infrastructure and hash functions [7]. On the one hand, the structure and protocols of blockchain technology. The
public key plays the role of receiving the address of cryp- contributions of this article are as follows: we outline the
tocurrency to participate in address exchange. Meanwhile, security of cryptocurrencies based on blockchain technology
the public key can be used to verify transaction information from multiple perspectives according to our proposed
and prevent transaction messages from being maliciously framework. First, we expand the study of Choi [13] and
Complexity 3

Blockchain Technology Platform

1400

1200

1000

Accumulative total 800

600

400

200

0
1980

1993

1996

1999

2001

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

2014

2016

2018

2020

Unknown
Year
Figure 1: Accumulative total of blockchain technology platform (note that the unknown means that the founded year of block chain
technology platforms is not clear).

consider the technical support from blockchain technology cryptocurrency have fundamentally changed the notion and
platforms by adopting empirical evidence to analyze their mode of perceiving virtual currencies of users, enterprises,
shortcomings. Second, it is noteworthy that prior studies, financial intermediaries, and governments [15–17]. First, a
from the perspective of users, focus on the basic security finite number of cryptocurrencies will ever be generated,
requirements for cryptocurrencies, but these studies fail to preventing overabundance and ensuring its rarity. Specifi-
formally take the basic principle of the secure hash algorithm cally, mining pools may constrain the sustainability of a
(SHA256) as an example of blockchain technology to de- cryptocurrency ecosystem. Because of this, cryptocurrency
scribe the security of data authenticity and the recording of has become a transformative technology and has attracted a
cryptocurrency in an intuitive manner. Third, we further growing and supportive community of developers and users
study Fu and Fang [14] to discuss the structure of blockchain [1]. Second, it is programmers and math instead of the
and define the security components of different layers. government that undertakes the technical control of cryp-
Moreover, our results show that these security components tocurrency [18]. Specifically, the operating principle of
have certain connections or joint effects in the blockchain. cryptocurrency is to solve encryption algorithms that aim at
Fourth, we emphasize the importance of protocols and their creating unique hashes. Third, blockchain technology
frameworks to maintain the security of cryptocurrencies by adopted in cryptocurrency can recognize users as owners of
comparing the underlying ledger structure of Bitcoin and their personal data, which decreases the cost of securing and
DAG. Additionally, we further compare 2 classic protocols compartmentalizing data [19]. Hence, the adopted tech-
of the DAG blockchain including the difference between nologies enable cryptocurrencies to perform the same
SPECTRE and PHANTOM. monetary functions as traditional currencies, as well as
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. significantly higher security and lower cost, and to play a
Section 2 presents a literature review. Section 3 introduces decentralized role.
the research methodology. Section 4 presents an analysis of Blockchain is composed of individual blocks. Each block
the technology and security of cryptocurrencies. Section 5 contains collections of transactions that are included in the
concludes. ledger. All transactions were recorded and stored in each
block [20]. In addition, cryptocurrency is referred to as an
2. Literature Review open and distributed ledger technology (DLT) that can
verify records and process requests in parallel but cannot
This section presents an overview of the current studies on the modify them [21, 22]. Nevertheless, the storage devices of
technological implementation of cryptocurrency and the secu- DLTs are connected from one to another and form a mesh
rity and stability of cryptocurrency, a discussion of the rela- [22]. These storage devices can then be expressed as nodes.
tionship between blockchain technology and the security of Physically, different nodes were separated. However, the
cryptocurrency, and the factors that facilitate risk and build trust. CRUD operations return the same results even though the
nodes that operate are different. Additionally, every node in
2.1. The Technological Implementation of Cryptocurrency. a platform or network can access authorized information for
As technology innovation is increasingly indispensable in the same permissions and obligations [21]. Moreover, nodes
financial sectors, technologies based on blockchain in in the network transfer data do not require mutual trust. To
4 Complexity

conclude, the DLT is architecturally distributed but logically

centralized [23]. Generally speaking, there is no significant Network
Bitcoin Core
distinction between blockchain, Bitcoin, cryptocurrency Validation
protocol, and distributed database structure [11, 24]. Nev-
ertheless, blockchain, back to the narrow sense of its defi-
nition, is regarded as a chained data structure that combines
information and data blocks in chronological order, and Armory
Keys
then encrypts records as a distributed ledger that cannot be Management
forged or tampered with [21].
In addition, most cryptocurrency protocols widely adopt Security
blockchain technology. These protocols involve crypto-
currency incentives, cryptography, and consensus mecha- Operating
Glacier Protocol Procedures
nisms. In particular, cryptocurrency protocols are regarded
as rules that regulate applications that can be performed
within a set environment [4]. For instance, the Nakamoto
protocol in Bitcoin decides the full order of blocks and then
confirms the full order of transactions [25]. Leading com- Purism Laptop Hardware
panies can implement their proprietary authentication
software using the OAuth protocol, which enables them to
serve as centralized trusted authorities [26, 27]. To guarantee Figure 2: The security of Bitcoin is based on blockchain
the targets of final security, a modular analysis benefits the technology.
exploration of the security properties of subprotocols [26].
For instance, the proof of solvency can be proved by a secure
cryptographic coprocessor, such as a trusted platform mainly includes the aspects of fault tolerance, network
module (TPM). Cryptocurrency also employs asymmetric resilience, scalability, and immutability when facing attacks.
encryption technology to safeguard the blockchain. In For example, security is achieved by a technology inter-
particular, the public and private keys constitute asymmetric section that generates different cryptocurrency protocols [4].
encryption. First, public key cryptography makes no other Cryptocurrency protocols can simultaneously display
user transfer other account values possible through digital technological components, including cryptography, DLT,
signatures. In addition, the private key is regarded as the sole consensus mechanisms, and cryptocurrency incentives.
basis for legally controlling cryptocurrency accounts for Nevertheless, stability is expected to be drawn attention to
users, ensuring the security of account assets [21]. Specifi- financial systems [31]. Particularly, stability is highly cor-
cally, the private key can be encrypted and stored in its wallet related to public blockchain mining owing to the existence of
unless the user exports it manually and then decrypted to a motivation that destroys cryptocurrency.
sign the transaction record upon request. For instance, First, cryptography realizes transaction encryption and
armory is used to manage private keys (see Figure 2). privacy protection and allows secure message exchanges
Nevertheless, cryptocurrency technology is unable to solve from participant to participant (P2P). Generally, the original
the account key theft and trading parameter tampering message of the sender is encrypted for security reasons,
caused by a lack of security awareness [28]. In addition, which requires the receiver to decrypt. Meanwhile, private-
privacy information is always stolen by attackers despite public addresses are created by protocols. Second, DLT has a
permissions through the desktop cryptocurrency wallet high risk, which influences the security of cryptocurrencies.
remote procedure call (RPC) interface, even though the According to Hileman and Rauchs [32], DLT varies
asymmetric encryption techniques safeguard the privacy and according to data access restrictions and limits on which
security of the participants [20, 29]. Furthermore, a shared parties can validate transactions. The most typical ledger is
consensus mechanism benefits the benign nodes to achieve the public ledger, which is a semi-anonymity that ensures
agreement on an almost immutable record of transactions by that each user sees each transaction. Hence, they have a
DLT. Above all, similar to bank transfers, transactions higher risk and are susceptible to attacks [33]. However, the
committed to the ledger make digital assets transfer from the decentralized consensus of blockchain transaction orders
asset owner to another available user. guarantees security that does not need trust among mem-
bers. In particular, the blockchain protocol can act as an
automated access control manager that does not require
2.2. The Security and Stability of the Cryptocurrency. The third-party trust [19]. Moreover, cryptocurrency incentives
binding between the state and international security is have significant effects on short-term operational decisions
changing due to the emergence of the Fourth Industrial involving security in selecting exchanges, especially the cost
Revolution because of the progress of information tech- of investing in security. Meanwhile, incentives at the pro-
nologies [30]. It is noteworthy that the information tech- tocol level of cryptocurrency are explicitly considered [34].
nology of blockchain, which is adopted in Bitcoin and other Thus, incentive misalignments in the cryptocurrency ex-
cryptocurrencies and has security features, has drawn our change market are critical for the security and viability of
attention. According to Febrero and Pereira [4], security public blockchain ecosystems.
Complexity 5

However, the multitude of criminals such as cybercrime To summarize, cryptocurrencies that adopt blockchain
in cryptocurrencies through DarkNet markets has been technology have shown great application advantages in fi-
sharply rising in recent years [35]. First, user information nance and the Internet and have displayed a trend of rapid
has been collected and analyzed for a long time and is development in multiple fields. However, cryptocurrency, as
regarded as a valuable asset in the big data era. In addition, an emerging digital virtual currency, is not stable and mature
the decentralized nature of cryptocurrency has greatly de- enough in terms of business management and technical
creased the possibility of securing each server that runs the implementation, and some security and privacy issues that
code. In addition, fraud and theft in cryptocurrency are are gradually exposed, and security incidents against the
increasingly popular because of faulty system setups by application of blockchain cryptocurrency also occur
exchange companies [1]. Furthermore, insider fraud and frequently.
external security compromise are the main sources of ex-
change. Nevertheless, the European Court of Justice con- 3. Research Methodology
sidered that Bitcoin transactions were exempt from value-
added tax in 2015, which maintains the stability of cryp- As shown in Figure 3, the framework of our technology and
tocurrencies [36]. security analysis of cryptocurrency based on blockchain
Hence, trust in employing blockchain technology has mainly includes security support from the blockchain
become a crucial problem faced by cryptocurrencies to technology platform and blockchain technology. The details
maintain their security and stability. First, the definition of are presented as follows: on the one hand, the majority of
trust in adopting blockchain technology includes security, blockchain technology platforms, to enable the development
comfort, and confidence [37, 38]. On the one hand, trust of next-generation multiparty applications, utilize distrib-
helps build a strong bridge for consumers to overcome uted ledger and confidential computing technologies, which
perceptions of risk and insecurity [39]. In particular, nu- foster and deliver digital trust between parties. Hence, we
merous general user bases hold the view that crypto- discuss security support from blockchain technology plat-
currencies are solely employed by criminals and are forms involving the aspects of raised funds, duration, em-
questionable in law. That is, the value fluctuation and the ployees, and especially the consensus algorithm. On the
legality of cryptocurrency may limit investor trust. One of other hand, blockchain technology shifts most users’ trust
the most typical examples is the affair of the bankruptcy of from human beings to machines by decentralizing control
Mt. Gox, mainly caused by the new code without version over the currency. Hence, we also analyze the security
control, which has scared many users and damaged the support from blockchain technology.
image of cryptocurrency [40]. This also proves that risk can In simple terms, our study focuses on the security of data
be generated by price volatility, discouraging consumers and authenticity and recording, blockchain structure, and pro-
merchants from holding cryptocurrency, which is also tocols. To better explain the security of data authenticity and
consistent with the view of PwC [41]. On the other hand, recording, we use the hash function (SHA256) as an example
consumers’ trust can build confidence. To achieve this to describe its principle. In addition, we divide the block-
purpose, permissioned ledgers, such as DLT that restrict chain structure into six layers and conclude that these layers
network participation, can ensure that the parties who have are composed of security and basic components. Finally, we
no sufficient trust form and maintain a consensus of a set of illustrate the security of the protocols in the case of Bitcoin
shared facts [42, 43]. In addition, exchanges tend to make and DAG. In particular, we compare the protocol security of
public display security investments and reassure customers SPECTRE and PHANTOM. Meanwhile, we also employ
to trust. Meanwhile, they compensate users for their own these examples to discuss the balance between security,
security breaches to construct trust. Above all, the proof of efficiency, and functionality of cryptocurrency protocols.
solvency reinforces consumers’ trust in the exchange.
Next, trust plays an indispensable role in creating a 4. Research on the Technology and Security of
security environment, which convinces users to accept
blockchain technology. In general, blockchain technology is
Cryptocurrency Based on Blockchain
complicated for users to accept [37]. Consequently, directly Cryptocurrency employs blockchain technology to maintain
or indirectly factors such as trust, security, and privacy can security and transaction processes. Specifically, the security
also encourage people to accept blockchain technology [44]. of cryptocurrency is supported by the blockchain technology
For instance, blockchain transaction systems are more likely platform and blockchain technology itself. Blockchain
to be accepted under the condition that usage risk is sharply technologies such as hash encryption, electronic signatures,
reduced [45]. In addition, the lower cost and shorter time asymmetric encryption, distributed ledgers, smart contracts,
with privacy or control may attract consumers to use and P2P networks are used to verify data and ensure safe
cryptocurrency [46]. To sum up, factors that directly or storage.
indirectly would encourage people to embrace technology
mainly are trust, security, and privacy. In addition, trust is
highly correlated with regulatory support and experience 4.1. The Security Support for Cryptocurrency from the Block-
[37]. Therefore, the security and user acceptance of cryp- chain Technology Platform. Security support from block-
tocurrency can be enhanced by the development of better chain technology platforms is insufficient. As shown in
software. Figure 4, we present a radar chart of the total funds raised,
6 Complexity

The Security of Cryptocurrency

Support
Blockchain Technology Platform Blockchain Technology

Data
Raised Consensus Authenticity Structure
Duration Employees Protocols
Funds Algorithm & (Six Layers)
Recording

Bitcoin protocol
&
Hash Basic Security
DAG protocol
Function components components
(e.g.PoW-based protocol:
SPECTRE & PHANTOM)

Figure 3: Framework.

Bitmain
3500
Stark Ware 3000 Dapper Labs
2500
2000
1500
1000
Core Scientific 500 Hyperchain Technology
0
-500

R3 Fireblocks

Hedera Hashgraph BitFury

Theta Network
Total raised
Duration
Employees
Figure 4: Radar chart of total raised funds, duration, and employees of blockchain technology platform.

duration, and employees of blockchain technology plat- and at an average of 5.8, which indicates that the global
forms. In Figure 4, the total raised funds of Bitmain ranks support and infrastructure for cryptocurrency are growing
top of blockchain technology platforms, Dapper Labs, and rapidly in the last decade, but most of these companies are
Hyperchain Technology, ranking the top two and three. young start-ups. Blockchain, which is treated as an im-
However, the funds raised by blockchain technology plat- mutable DLT, is the underlying technology behind cryp-
forms are much less than those of traditional Internet fi- tocurrencies [47]. Hence, the ability of blockchain
nancial platforms, such as Lufax. In addition, the duration of technology platforms to sustain the security and stability of
these blockchain technology platforms is between 3 and 10, cryptocurrencies may be significantly deficient. Moreover,
Complexity 7

Bitmain employees rank first among blockchain technology applicaryer, contract layer, incentive layer, consensus layer,
platforms. In particular, Bitmain has 3000 staff, whereas network layer, and data layer. Each layer contained basic
StarkWare has only 37. Additionally, the employees of the and security components. On the one hand, basic com-
blockchain technology platform are ranked as follows: ponents are used to realize the main business logic func-
Bitmain > R3 > Hyperchain Technology > Dapper Labs > He- tions of the layer. On the other hand, security components
dera Hashgraph > Core Scientific > BitFury > Fireblock > are used to deal with frequent security threats and provide
StarkWare > Theta Network. In other words, the human threat response solutions and technical security support for
resource gap among blockchain technology platforms is the layer and upper layer. In addition, these security
prominent. In addition, there is a marked difference in the components may have certain connections or joint effects
speed of the crisis response of blockchain technology in the blockchain.
platforms. Thus, our results are consistent with the market The application layer involves all services and features
share of Bitmain and prove that Bitcoin has been the implemented in the form of smart contracts and is based on
largest manufacturer of new Bitcoin mining machines and a remote cloud. Hence, users in a blockchain system can also
hardware. employ application-layer services. Meanwhile, the applica-
Blockchain technology platforms also play a crucial role tion layer can provide an interface for the underlying
in the selection of consensus algorithms for blockchain message transmission and application. The application layer
practitioners. First, a consensus mechanism with high se- mainly includes the basic components—APIs and cross-
curity requires computational resources. These platforms chain heterogeneity, and the security compo-
employ computationally intensive asymmetric key tech- nents—regulatory mechanism and cloud service. The ap-
nology to help users identify and verify transactions. Second, plication programming interface (API) is not provided to
available blockchain technology platforms lack uniformity interact with service interfaces in the blockchain. In addi-
in accessing built-in APIs. A typical example is that Bitmain tion, heterogeneous blockchains migrate data from one
leverages the inflexibility of Bitcoin’s PoW and makes full blockchain to another. Therefore, to ensure confidentiality
use of its computation capability of miners to achieve its and privacy, a cross-chain data migration architecture was
success after promoting their Antminer-ASIC chip generated. In addition, the regulatory mechanism of
products. blockchain has drawn the government’s attention and in-
creased regulatory costs. Nevertheless, regulatory mecha-
nisms, such as laws and regulations, secure the democratic
4.2. The Security Support for Cryptocurrency from Blockchain accountability of blockchain technology. Furthermore,
Technology cloud services can provide identity authentication for IoT
4.2.1. Analysis of the Security of Data Authenticity and Re- devices based on their computing and resource storage
cording of Cryptocurrency Based on Blockchain Technology. abilities.
The security of data authenticity and the recording of The contract layer is designed to set rules for blockchain
cryptocurrency mainly depend on encryption. Specifically, systems to interact with each other. First, advanced smart
digital signatures and cryptographic hash functions signif- contracts can achieve programs and commands, operate
icantly influence the security of cryptocurrencies. asset transactions, and manage smart assets in blockchain
Digital signatures and their hashing algorithm can 2.0, which further expands the application layer. For users,
confirm whether the identity of the signatory and the smart contracts are automatic guarantee plans that can
transaction have been identified. Meanwhile, they confirmed ensure the objectiveness of the execution. Specifically, these
ownership. Technically, attackers, owing to the crypto- contracts release or transmit data when they meet certain
graphic hash function such as the SHA256 algorithm, have conditions. Contracts such as Hyperledger can deal with
to guess 256-bit strings correctly to breach the security mutual trust issues among participants. Likewise, script
systems of cryptocurrencies. The cryptographic hash func- coding plays a critical role in maintaining the security of
tion is infeasible to be inverse under the current computing smart contracts. Furthermore, the sandbox environments
power. In other words, there is no better method than guess vary from country to country. Additionally, the sandbox
and random check for attackers to find a message of arbi- regulation involves the regulatory sandbox, industry sand-
trary length that has a specific string of 256 bits (note that box, and umbrella sandbox. More importantly, formal
acquiring the message requires, on average, 2256 guesses) in verification of blockchain is chiefly based on mathematics
general, which benefits the given piece of security of and can check and verify unknown vulnerabilities, such as
cryptocurrency. Additionally, the records in the blockchain logical vulnerabilities in contracts. Employing a testing
can be queried by every participant, which indicates that the network can guarantee configuration flexibility. For exam-
information in the system is transparent and open, and ple, a test network was adopted in the Ethereum wallet.
reliable. Furthermore, program analysis tools were used to optimize
and correct the programs. Hence, smart contracts, script
coding, sandbox environments, formal verification, testing
4.2.2. Analysis of the Cryptocurrency Security Based on the networks, and program analysis tools can be considered
Structure of Blockchain Technology. The structure of components. Nevertheless, the programming language
blockchain technology, as it is shown in Figure 5, is provides a standard method to write the blueprints and
considered a hierarchical system and mainly includes the contracts of blockchain.
8 Complexity

APIs
Application
Layer
Regulatory Mechanism Cross Chain Heterogeneity Cloud Service

Smart Contract Programming Language Formal Verification

Contract
Program AnalysisTools
Layer
Testing Network Sandbox Environment
Script Coding

Incentive Mechanism Distribution Mode

Incentive
Blockchain
Layer Mechanism Optimization

PoW PoS PBFT

Consensus
Layer Verification Mechanism Trusted Hardware

Slicing Technology Networking Mode Extended Network

Network
ANC Technology
Layer
Verification Mechanism P2P Network
Intrusion Detection

Block Chained Data Structure

Data
Layer Data Transaction Key Management Cryptography

: Basic Components
: Security Components

Figure 5: The basic structure of blockchain.

The incentive layer involves incentive mechanisms in mainly include Proof of Work (PoW), Proof of Stake (PoS),
cryptocurrencies to accelerate resource sharing, stimulate and Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance (PBFT). These
group intelligence, and promote collaborative communi- protocols aim at maintaining a peer-peer consensus state for
cation. In addition, the incentive mechanism is regarded as a blockchain systems. More importantly, trusted hardware
monetary incentive that responds to information about such as Intel SGX is used to improve the performance of
events. Meanwhile, monetary incentives share the correct PoW and PBFT. In addition, trusted hardware such as the
information. Specifically, the initiators provide incentives TrustZone of Intel SGX can also enhance security at a slight
after verifying the repliers’ signatures from its procedure in cost of performance. More precisely, the security of trusted
the blockchain. In addition, incentive schemes can be used to hardware relies on a trusted computing base (TCB). Ad-
detect malicious miners. Next, the distribution mode in the ditionally, the smaller the TCB, the better the security. In
incentive layer can operate data and store and handle ad- fact, the consensus mechanism can verify and record data
ditional images that contribute to parallel large-image into a blockchain, which makes a blockchain ledger that is
processing. Moreover, the incentive layer integrates eco- immutable, irrevocable, and traceable.
nomic incentives and distribution mechanisms into the The security of the network layer has a decisive effect on
blockchain. the security of the cryptocurrency system. In particular, the
The consensus layer mainly contains consensus proto- bigger the network, the stronger the protection against at-
cols that are adopted to share information and conduct tacks and data corruption, which makes Bitcoin the most
transactions. Moreover, consensus agreements league secure blockchain. Meanwhile, the network may require a
multiple organizations to build a consortium system. Bitcoin core (see Figure 2) for users. In general, the network
Moreover, the consistent and efficient problems in dis- layer receives and transmits data and verification mecha-
tributed scenarios of blockchain can be solved by a con- nisms. For instance, the P2P network structure has the
sensus mechanism. The prevailing consensus protocols features of decentralization, load balance, fault tolerance,
Complexity 9

and privacy protection [20, 48]. Meanwhile, the P2P network transactions were coordinated and executed through a
can be a small-world model, which implies that the ro- public ledger. This layer targets data collection, validation,
bustness and data integrity of the network can be guaranteed and manipulation. Data management makes data confi-
dynamically when nodes are changing. In addition, the dentiality possible, ensures data security, and protects the
security and privacy of P2P data transactions are critical for privacy of users from leaking. In addition, keys grow rapidly
P2P networks. Thus, we conclude that the P2P network is a owing to the complexity of access relationships. Further-
security component for the blockchain. More importantly, more, key management achieves hierarchical access control
P2P networks can verify and synchronize data. In general, a and is stored in the blockchain, and acts as a public ledger.
network layer specifies a verification mechanism. For in- Specifically, the key pool assigns each node a unique key
stance, the network nodes verify the received data or new chain, which ensures hierarchical access control. Addi-
blocks based on predefined specifications. Hence, we may tionally, key management can simplify the key transfer
conclude that the verification mechanism in the network handshake procedure, decrease the key transfer time, im-
layer can be regarded as a “software-defined” trust and a prove efficiency, and guarantee security. However, key
security component. Next, the blockchain network layer management is usually controlled by users instead of a third
encapsulates the networking mode. For example, the net- party for privacy-oriented scenarios. Cryptography tech-
work layer contains a P2P network-networking mode. Most nology ensures the ability of the ledger to detect tampering
networking modes are peer-to-peer networks and can with blockchain data. For instance, the hash (Merkle) tree
quickly detect the link state of the Internet. Furthermore, an solves the problem of authenticated nodes that act mali-
extended network of miners can be generated using a hash ciously in a private blockchain. Moreover, users are expected
code. Specifically, two miners simultaneously mine two to back up passphrases to ensure security and disclosure.
different blocks, which may result in a fork. The blockchain Hence, we may conclude that data transactions, key man-
is then extended to process transactions in the extended agement, and cryptography are security components.
network. Similar to the P2P network, anonymity-providing
networks also consider adversary security requirements and
adversary models, even though their requirements regarding 4.2.3. Analysis of the Security of Cryptocurrency Based on the
information propagation are different. In addition, the Protocols of Blockchain Technology. Cryptocurrency trans-
communication anonymity-providing systems safeguard the actions are known to be high throughout and require fast
confidentiality of the exchanged data between the sender and confirmation times. Above all, security in cryptocurrency
receiver. However, anonymity is attacked by linking network transactions is critical for users to invest. Therefore, cryp-
data to the application data. Furthermore, the anonymity of tocurrencies have various protocols to solve these problems.
the users can be attacked by gathering data from operating However, the underlying technology of these crypto-
the seed node. For instance, many cryptocurrencies, such as currencies is still centered on blockchain technology. Be-
Bitcoin, have issued operator policies to ensure security. sides, their main ideas were consistent with the protocols
Therefore, anonymous network communication (ANC) proposed by Nakamoto [11]. The protocols of crypto-
technology can be considered a security component. Fur- currencies involve cryptography, distributed ledgers, de-
thermore, intrusion detection in the network layer detects centralization, consensus mechanisms, and incentives to
endangered network behavior in computer systems. Gen- maintain an efficient and stable function and the security of a
erally, intrusion detection can be divided into anomaly- blockchain system.
based and feature-based intrusion detection methods. The Firstly, we compare the underlying ledger structure of
former is for normal user behavior definition and identi- Bitcoin with that of a directed acyclic graph (DAG). In
fication, and the latter is for the characteristics of the re- general, the underlying ledger structure of Bitcoin is a single
ceived packet behavior extraction and comparison. In chain. Ideally, the next block can be packaged as a candidate
intrusion detection, the improved semi-distributed topology block broadcast only after the previous one has been con-
can strengthen the stability of the system. In particular, the firmed and added to the chain by the whole network.
advantages of distributed networks make the accuracy rate However, the block output speed is much faster than
reach the network limit. More importantly, the TCP/IP broadcast, which generates forks. To put it differently, a
protocol in the network layer was utilized for information block is being dug up and broadcast before the whole
detection. Next, the slicing technology can multiplex a network can confirm it. More importantly, Bitcoin deter-
network that is virtualized and independent logical in mines its main chain based on the “longest chain consensus,”
identical physical network devices and delivers information- which enables the exclusion of intentionally evil nodes and
centric networking (ICN) services. A typical example is that eliminates the situation that two nodes produce blocks si-
the Internet of Things (IoT) edge network is built using an multaneity. Additionally, the consensus can discard forked
ICN slicing framework. blocks that are not part of the main chain. Nevertheless,
The data layer mainly contains data structures, block forks are unavoidable due to accidental factors such as
contents, and data transactions of the blockchain. The network latency. Thus, the security issues caused by forks
chained data structure refers to the blocks of data and in- have aroused our concern. The protocol of Bitcoin controls
formation that are combined in chronological order, and the block creation time of 10 minutes and stipulates that a
then, these blocks are encrypted and recorded as a dis- block can be guaranteed to be on the “longest chain” after the
tributed ledger that cannot be tampered with or forged. All confirmation of six blocks. Although the security risks
10 Complexity

caused by the fork can be avoided, these settings severely protocol designs a mechanism to resolve conflicting trans-
limit the transaction processing performance of Bitcoin, and actions by calculating votes 47. Hence, we introduce the
the TPS (transaction per second) is solely about 7. However, voting algorithm pseudocode of SPECTRE (see Figure 7).
it is noteworthy that DAG is expected to solve the problems SPECTRE defines that transactions in block x occur
above [48]. before block y, denoted as x < y; otherwise, x > y. Addi-
As it is shown in Figure 6, we make a more intuitive tionally, the voting algorithm is to be adopted to launch all
comparison between the two structures. DAG mainly has 5 nodes Z (Z ∈ G) in the whole DAG block G to vote for the
mathematical properties, which are highly related to security final and accurate transaction result when there is a conflict
issues. To start with, DAG has a topological structure that between the transaction information recorded in the block x
allows forking, and the topological order for all nodes can be and y. The voting process can be expressed as votex,y (z, G),
transformed into a node sequence, where the number of the where votex,y (z, G) � −1 depicts x < y, votex,y (z, G) � 1
allowed forks is determined by the fork coefficient k (k is an captures x > y, and votex,y (z, G) � 0 represents a draw.
integer greater than 0) of the system. To put it another way, Specifically, the voting rules are that 2 conflicting blocks x
the block output speed may exceed the broadcast speed. and y vote for themselves (i.e., −1 and +1, respectively), the
Meantime, the network node can record different infor- future blocks created after block x are denoted as future(x),
mation at the same time. More importantly, the system where future blocks of x can merely be backdated to x, and so
based on the DAG structure usually presents the charac- can y. In addition, the blocks generated before x or y can be
teristics of high concurrency, weak synchronization, and seen as the sum of their own past blocks, and be written as
high TPS owe to the DAG asynchronous accounting past(x) and past(y) separately. Subsequently, each block
method. Secondly, the connected nodes in the DAG can be counts votes for its own future block and then votes for the
sorted. Thirdly, DAG has a unique transitive closure. one that wins the most votes. Thus, a voting conflict reso-
Fourthly, the shortest path and the longest path can be lution process is completed.
solved in linear time when given 2 nodes in DAG. Fifthly, To summarize, the algorithmic idea of voting ensures
DAG has a unique transfer protocol. However, the Bitcoin the network security of the DAG blockchain. On the one
blockchain can only point to the previous unique block, hand, the algorithm makes the honest block vote for the
while the DAG has the capability of pointing to multiple honest block. In addition, the honest block behind gives the
blocks. Specifically, the block header of the Bitcoin block- stack power to the front. As a consequence, the malicious
chain only contains a hash of one block, pointing to a unique attack failed, and the security calculation power can reach
parent block, whereas that of a DAG includes hash values for 51% [25]. On the other hand, SPECTRE also analyzes
multiple blocks, pointing to different former ones. malicious attacks that are unable to point to the previous
To better explain the security of cryptocurrency proto- block or produce blocks that are not distributed to
cols, we further compare 2 classic protocols of DAG neighboring nodes. In the voting algorithm, attackers with
blockchain including the PoW-based protocol “Serialization less than 50% of the power are failed. Therefore, the
of Proof-of-work Events: Confirming Transactions via Re- SPECTRE protocol can resist “double-spend attacks” and
cursive Elections” (SPECTRE) and PHANTOM. At first, we “censorship attacks” effectively.
discuss the structure of SPECTRE, which ensures network Thirdly, the essence of the blockchain of cryptocurrency
security and robustness from its block produce, conflict is a ledger whose transaction information directly deter-
resolution, and generated trusted transaction sets. Firstly, mines the asset information of users. Hence, accurate, au-
the SPECTRE was proposed by Ref. [49] who abandoned the thentic, and nonmodifiable transaction information is
traditional concept of the main chain in the protocol. In increasingly imperative for cryptocurrency protocols. Be-
particular, all generated blocks are not discarded and form sides, the procedure that SPECTRE protocol generates
the structure of the ledger. As a matter of fact, the rules for trusted transaction sets can be summarized as follows: first of
mining the SPECTRE protocol are primitive. The protocol all, it traverses the block, extracts the transaction infor-
states that new blocks are generated based on the blocks’ fork mation in turn, and then adds the conflict-free transaction to
ends. In addition, the protocol also removes the requirement its set. However, conflict transactions with insufficient ac-
that miners maintain a nonconflicting transaction. These count balances may be added to the conflict transaction set.
settings allow miners to operate simultaneously and reduce Next, conflicting transactions, according to the voting al-
block time intervals significantly, maximizing transaction gorithm, are voted in turn and then generate conflicting
recording speed and increasing transaction processing block order sets, which makes identifying valid transaction
capacity. information possible. Furthermore, the voted valid trans-
Secondly, the SPECTRE protocol, to ensure transaction actions are added to the conflict-free transaction set. Finally,
processing efficiency, specifies that conflict resolution tasks the transactions that have been concentrated for more than a
have no occasion to be performed during the mining phase. certain time in a conflict-free transaction set are adopted to
Thus, SPECTRE is an efficient protocol that permits miners build a trusted transaction pool, which ensures the trans-
to concurrently and more frequently create blocks but does action information is virtually unable to be tampered with.
not need to agree on the main chain or is not affected by the However, once two conflicting transactions are published
network propagation delays. Meanwhile, knowledge of the simultaneously, such that the same funds are moved to two
propagation delay in the network is not necessary for different locations, the identity of the prevailing transaction
running a mining node. More precisely, the SPECTRE might remain undetermined for arbitrarily long periods,
Complexity 11

genesis genesis
block block

(a) (b)

Figure 6: Structure comparison of Bitcoin blockchain (a) and DAG (b).

Figure 7: The voting algorithm pseudocode of SPECTRE.

which indicates that the owner’s funds are secured by the blocks if they are not released immediately. Moreover, given
cryptographic signatures. the maximum latency of the network, the honest blocks are
From Figure 8, we can see that the RDL framework of bound to spread through the whole network after a certain
SPECTRE meets the requirement of cryptocurrency secu- period of time. Meantime, it is worth noting that connec-
rity. In addition, honest users will do the same as long as an tivity has a threshold k below which blocks are considered
honest user ϵ-accepted a transaction using ChkRobus- evil and at an inferior position in sorting. Thus, honest
tAccept, which benefits the security confirmation of trans- blocks and evil blocks can be divided into strongly connected
ferring funds and then maintains the security of the RDL blue blocks and weakly connected red blocks, respectively.
framework of SPECTRE. Additionally, PHANTOM, compared to SPECTRE, inte-
Generally speaking, PHANTOM and SPECTRE have the grates smart contract functionality. Concretely, the language
same mining mechanism. Nevertheless, the protocol of smart contracts requires operations to be performed in a
PHANTOM proposed by [50] makes up for the defect of strict order, which requires that the smart contract-enabled
SPECTRE that is unable to absolute sort for all the blocks. blockchain network is characterized by a linear ordering of
Above all, the PHANTOM identifies evil blocks by transactions in chronological sequence. Hence, PHANTOM
employing block connectivity analysis (note that block creates a strict linear order for DAG blockchains and
connectivity analysis mainly targets analyzing the edges benefits the deployment of the smart contract.
pointed to and the ones that are pointed) and ensures their To sum up, we compare the basic characteristics of the
security. For instance, 2 common scenarios for attacks on protocols of Bitcoin, SPECTRE, and PHANTOM in Table 1.
DAG blockchains cause the reduced connection between Apparently, protocols play imperative roles throughout the
evil blocks and other blocks. On the one hand, the generated implementation process of cryptocurrency. Above all, the
blocks are not based on known end blocks, which results in underlying ledger structure and consensus mechanism are
fewer blocks that own blocks point to. On the other hand, the 2 core elements (Figure 9) that make up a blockchain,
blocks generated by other nodes cannot point to their own and confirmation time, throughput limit, and ordering are
12 Complexity

Get Accepted: Input: a user’s current world view

Distributed Ledgers Output: a consistent subset of accepted transactions

(RDL)

Input: (1) a user’s current world view

ChkRobustAccept: (2) a transaction from the accepted subset
(3) ∊

(Security confirmation on funds transferring)

Output: Transaction reversal probability < ∊:Accept

Transaction reversal probability ≥ ∊:Wait

Figure 8: The security in RDL framework.

Table. 1: The basic characteristics of Bitcoin, SPECTRE, and PHANTOM.

Confirmation times
Protocol Ledger structure Transaction conflict solution Throughput limit Ordering
Conflicts No conflicts
Bitcoin Single chain Longest chain Slow Slow Latency Linear
SPECTRE DAG Voting procedure Not guaranteed Very fast Capacity Pairwise
PHANTOM DAG Block connectivity analysis Very slow Slow Capacity Linear

Mining Consensus Ensure System Efficiency

Consensus
Mechanism
Prevent Transaction
Conflicts and Attacks

Mining Consensus

Cryptocurrency
Time-Sequence (Support
Protocols
Intelligent Contract)

Underlying Ledger
Structure

Figure 9: The core elements of cryptocurrency protocols.

prerequisites for smart contracts. In particular, Bitcoin, no choice but to stipulate the waiting periods of up to six
acting as the first formal cryptocurrency protocol, represents blocks and ten minutes for transaction confirmation.
the single main chain structure and linear order. Addi- Nevertheless, SPECTRE reconstructs the underlying ledger
tionally, the transaction information in low-height blocks structure prescribed by Bitcoin, allowing for a large number
has a higher priority than that in high-height blocks. of forks. Additionally, block heights cannot represent linear
Meanwhile, the high height blocks are unable to contain the order, and neither the transactions in the front blocks are
transaction that conflicts with the low height blocks. What’s necessarily preceded that of the later fork blocks. Further-
more, the Bitcoin protocol, to minimize the risk of a fork, has more, the validity of the transaction information is
Complexity 13

determined by the voting algorithm. More importantly, the composed of the security components and basic components
block voting algorithm can be implemented immediately. of six layers that are independent and cannot be extended
Meantime, the protocol allows for the inclusion of all forked completely and have a certain coupling among them.
blocks and has stronger transaction processing power than Furthermore, we compare the underlying ledger struc-
that of Bitcoin, up to 10 seconds of transaction confirmation ture of Bitcoin and DAG and find that Bitcoin determines its
time, more comprehensive attack resistance, and actual 51% main chain based on the “longest chain consensus,” which
security computing power. The PHANTOM protocol im- enables the exclusion of intentionally evil nodes, eliminates
plements linear ordering of DAG blockchain structures, as the situation that two nodes produce blocks simultaneity,
well as conflict-free transactions and trusted transaction and discards forked blocks that are not part of the main
confirmation. The protocol costs a lot of time but meets the chain. Nevertheless, these forks have aroused security
deployment requirements of smart contracts. concerns that cannot be solved by Bitcoin totally. In addi-
tion, DAG has 5 mathematical properties, which are highly
5. Limitations and Concluding Remarks related to security issues. Moreover, we further compare 2
classic protocols of DAG blockchain including SPECTRE
Nevertheless, our study has some inevitable limitations, and PHANTOM and find that the structure of SPECTRE
which are expected to be solved in the near future. Firstly, ensures network security and robustness from its block
some cryptocurrency protocols are not open source, which production, conflict resolution, and generated trusted
indicates that we cannot make intuitive comparisons on the transaction sets. Meanwhile, the voting algorithm of
protocol differences of the first 10 cryptocurrencies. Sec- SPECTRE makes resolving conflicting transactions by cal-
ondly, the influences of the total funds raised, duration, and culating votes and ensuring the transaction information that
employees of blockchain technology platforms on the is virtually unable to be tampered with possible. In partic-
technology progress and security of cryptocurrency are not ular, the security calculation power of SPECTRE can reach
clear. Besides, users may not give enough trust to crypto- 51%, and resist “double-spend attacks” and “censorship
currencies in the short term even though they are technically attacks” effectively. Furthermore, the RDL framework of
safe. Meanwhile, the future of cryptocurrencies is highly SPECTRE meets the requirement of cryptocurrency secu-
uncertain with the contraction of national policies on rity. Next, we also find that the protocol PHANTOM makes
emerging currencies. Thirdly, the protocols of Bitcoin, up for the defect of SPECTRE, which is unable to absolute
SPECTRE, and PHANTOM have their own advantages in sort for all the blocks. Besides, PHANTOM identifies evil
terms of security capabilities. However, how to improve blocks by employing block connectivity analysis and ensures
their security capabilities from the protocol itself is difficult its security. Eventually, we compare the basic characteristics
and restricted by user demand. of the protocols of Bitcoin, SPECTRE, and PHANTOM and
Our purpose was to provide a point of entry for financial find that protocols play imperative roles throughout the
researchers and the government to gain a better under- implementation process of cryptocurrency even though they
standing of the significant issues surrounding the security of have significant differences. Besides, the underlying ledger
cryptocurrencies based on blockchain. In particular, this structure and consensus mechanism are the 2 core elements
article reviews the technological implementation of cryp- that make up a blockchain, and confirmation time,
tocurrency, and the security and stability of cryptocurrency, throughput limit, and ordering are prerequisites for smart
and analyzes security support from blockchain technology contracts.
platforms and blockchain technology. The empirical results The results also yield several practical implications for
of the top 10 blockchain technology platforms show that the the security of cryptocurrencies. First, the scale and amount
security support from these platforms is insufficient and of blockchain technology platforms should be increased.
immature. Among these, the Bitmain platform plays a Meanwhile, these platforms are expected to safeguard
critical role in security support and has significant advan- sensitive business data while they are being used, which can
tages in terms of raised funds, duration, and human re- compensate for their insufficient support for the security and
sources compared to the study of Zyskind et al. [19] and stability of cryptocurrencies. For instance, blockchain
Choi [13]. In addition, these blockchain technology plat- technology platforms ought to focus on shared business
forms provide computational resources and benefit the problems across markets faced by customers and secure
selection of consensus algorithms for blockchain aggregated datasets based on their computational resources.
practitioners. Second, these platforms are supposed to revolve around
Next, the digital signatures and principle of the hash the improvement of the consensus mechanism, especially
algorithm (SHA256) show that encryption ensures the se- the balance between decentralization, security, and scal-
curity of cryptocurrencies. In particular, the former iden- ability of the consensus mechanism. Then, a consensus
tifies the identity of the signatory and transaction, while the mechanism can act as the core link to solve the problem of
latter confirms ownership. In addition, SHA256 is infeasible consistency and maintain the security of the blockchain
for computing in the reverse direction and is difficult to consensus. Third, the hash function and other encryption
attack. Moreover, the records in the blockchain can be algorithms are facing the threat of emerging quantum
queried by every participant, making the system information computing technology, which may integrate blockchain
transparent and open reliable. Then, we further study Fu and technology with quantum cryptography to secure the nec-
Fang [14] and propose a blockchain structure that is essary data. Blockchain technology is expected to implement
14 Complexity

a more secure privacy protection scheme while exchanging [8] R. Kirkland and D. Tapscott, “How Blockchains Could
data efficiently and actively exploring emerging encryption Change the World,” 2016, https://www.mckinsey.com/
techniques such as homomorphic encryption and zero- industries/technology-media-and telecommunications/our-
knowledge proof, and privacy protection techniques such as insights/how-Blockchains-could-change-the world.
anonymous communication technology. Fourth, the inter- [9] A. Walch, “The bitcoin blockchain as financial market in-
frastructure: A consideration of operational risk,” NYU
nal mechanism among the security components of the six
Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, vol. 18, p. 837, 2015,
layers should be concentrated on in future studies. Fifth, the https://ssrn.com/abstract=2579482.
balance between security, efficiency, and functionality of [10] K. Werbach, “Trust, but verify: why the blockchain needs the
cryptocurrency protocols should be drawn attention to and law,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal, vol. 33, p. 487, 2018.
regarded as the goal of future exploration. Above all, the [11] S. Nakamoto, “Bitcoin: a peer-to-peer electronic cash system,”
RDL framework in protocols should be considered to Decentralized Business Review, Article ID 21260, 2008.
maintain the security of cryptocurrencies. [12] A. Noda, “On the evolution of cryptocurrency market effi-
ciency,” Applied Economics Letters, vol. 28, no. 6, pp. 433–439,
2021.
Data Availability [13] T.-M. Choi, “Blockchain-technology-supported platforms for
The data used to support the findings of this study are diamond authentication and certification in luxury supply
chains,” Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and
available from the corresponding author upon request.
Transportation Review, vol. 128, pp. 17–29, 2019.
[14] D. Fu and L. Fang, “Blockchain-based trusted computing in
Conflicts of Interest social network,” in Proceedings of the 2016 2nd IEEE Inter-
national Conference on Computer and Communications
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. (ICCC), pp. 19–22, IEEE, Chengdu, China, October 2016.
[15] Y. Su and Q. Fan, “Renewable energy technology innovation,
Authors’ Contributions industrial structure upgrading and green development from the
perspective of China’s provinces,” Technological Forecasting and
Feiyu Xie and Chao Yu contributed equally to this work. Social Change, vol. 180Article ID 121727, 2022, https://www.
They are the cofirst authors. sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0040162522002530.
[16] Y. Su, X. Jiang, and Z. Lin, “Simulation and relationship
strength: characteristics of knowledge flows among subjects in
Acknowledgments a regional innovation system,” Science Technology & Society,
vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 459–481, 2021.
The authors are grateful for the financial support from the [17] E. C. Bank, “Virtual currency schemes,” 2012, http://www.ecb.
National Natural Science Foundation of China (71971055, europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.
72173018). pdf.
[18] T. Moore and N. Christin, “Beware the middleman: empirical
analysis of bitcoin-exchange risk,” Financial Cryptography and
References Data Security, vol. 7859, pp. 25–33, Springer, 2013, https://link.
[1] P. D. DeVries, “An analysis of cryptocurrency, bitcoin, and springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-39884-1_3.
the future,” International Journal of Business Management [19] G. Zyskind and O. Nathan, “Decentralizing privacy: using
and Commerce, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 1–9, 2016. blockchain to protect personal data,” in Proceedings of the
[2] M. Risius and K. Spohrer, “A blockchain research frame- 2015 IEEE Security and Privacy Workshops, pp. 180–184,
work,” Business & Information Systems Engineering, vol. 59, IEEE, CA, USA, May 2015.
no. 6, pp. 385–409, 2017, https://link.springer.com/article/10. [20] Y. Lu, “The blockchain: state-of-the-art and research chal-
1007/s12599-017-0506-0. lenges,” Journal of Industrial Information Integration, vol. 15,
[3] T. Tarasova, O. Usatenko, A. Makurin, V. Ivanenko, and pp. 80–90, 2019.
A. Cherchata, “Accounting and features of mathematical [21] D. He, S. Li, C. Li et al., “Security analysis of cryptocurrency
modeling of the system to forecast cryptocurrency exchange wallets in android-based applications,” IEEE Network, vol. 34,
rate,” Accounting, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 357–364, 2020. no. 6, pp. 114–119, 2020.
[4] P. Febrero and J. Pereira, “Cryptocurrency Constellations [22] A. Sunyaev, “Distributed ledger technology,” Internet Com-
across the Three Dimensional Space: Governance Decen- puting, Springer, Cham, pp. 265–299, 2020.
tralization, Security, and Scalability,” IEEE Transactions on [23] V. Buterin, “The meaning of decentralization,” 2017, https://
Engineering Management, 2020, https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/ medium.com/@VitalikButerin/the-meaning-of-
abstract/document/9254134. decentralization-a0c92b76a274.
[5] S. Davidson, P. De Filippi, and J. Potts, “Blockchains and the [24] K. Fani, M. Ferreira, and C. de Vroomen, “An exploration of
economic institutions of capitalism,” Journal of Institutional state-of-the-art blockchain scalability approaches,” https://www.
Economics, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 639–658, 2018. semanticscholar.org/paper/An-Exploration-of-State-ofthe-
[6] V. Shermin, “Disrupting governance with blockchains and Art- Blockchain-Fani-Ferreira/7cdeb2c8e132c2e003255d03dc
smart contracts,” Strategic Change, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 499–509, 3d14684831f8942019.
2017. [25] Y. Sompolinsky, Y. Lewenberg, and A. Zohar, “Spectre: a fast
[7] M. Zachariadis, G. Hileman, and S. V. Scott, “Governance and and scalable cryptocurrency protocol,” IACR Cryptol. ePrint
control in distributed ledgers: understanding the challenges Arch.vol. 2016, no. 1159, 2016.
facing blockchain technology in financial services,” Infor- [26] X. Li, J. Xu, Z. Zhang, X. Lan, and Y. Wang, “Modular security
mation and Organization, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 105–117, 2019. analysis of oauth 2.0 in the three-party setting,” in Proceedings
Complexity 15

of the 2020 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy [45] A. Kesharwani and S. Singh Bisht, “The impact of trust and
(EuroS&P), pp. 276–293, IEEE, Genoa, Italy, September 2020. perceived risk on internet banking adoption in India,” In-
[27] N. Sakimura, J. Bradley, B. de Medeiros, and C. Mortimore, ternational Journal of Bank Marketing, vol. 30, no. 4,
“Openid Connect Core 1.0 Incorporating Errata Set 1,” 2014, pp. 303–322, 2012, https://www.emerald.com/insight/
http://openid.net/specs/openid-connect-core-10.html. content/doi/10.1108/02652321211236923/full/html.
[28] J. Cant, “Gatehub Crypto Wallet Data Breach Compromises [46] C. Martins, T. Oliveira, and A. Popovič, “Understanding the
Passwords of 1.4m Users,” 2019, https://cointelegraph.com/ internet banking adoption: a unified theory of acceptance and
news/gatehub-cryptowallet-data-breach-compromises- use of technology and perceived risk application,” Interna-
passwords-of-14m-users. tional Journal of Information Management, vol. 34, no. 1,
[29] T. Bui, S. P. Rao, M. Antikainen, and T. Aura, “Pitfalls of open pp. 1–13, 2014.
architecture: how friends can exploit your cryptocurrency [47] M. H. u. Rehman, K. Salah, E. Damiani, and D. Svetinovic,
wallet,” in Proceedings of the 12th European Workshop on “Trust in blockchain cryptocurrency ecosystem,” IEEE
Systems Security, pp. 1–6, Dresden Germany, March 2019. Transactions on Engineering Management, vol. 67, no. 4,
[30] K. Schwab, “The Fourth Industrial Revolution: What it Means, pp. 1196–1212, 2020.
How to Respond,” Economy, Culture & History Japan Spot- [48] M. Crosby, P. Pattanayak, S. Verma, and V. Kalyanaraman,
light Bimonthly, Japan Economic Foundation, Tokyo, 2016. “Blockchain technology: beyond bitcoin,” Applied Innovation,
[31] S. Lu, S. Li, W. Zhou, and W. Yang, “Network herding of vol. 2, no. 71, pp. 6–10, 2016.
energy funds in the post-Carbon-Peak Policy era: does it [49] R. Böhme and T. Okamoto, “Financial Cryptography and
benefit profitability and stability?” Energy Economics, vol. 109, Data Security,” revised selected papers in Proceedings of the
Article ID 105948, 2022. 19th International Conference, fc, san juan, puerto rico,
[32] G. Hileman and M. Rauchs, “Global cryptocurrency bench- vol. 8975, pp. 26–30, Curaçao, March 2015.
marking study,” Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, [50] Y. Sompolinsky, Y. Lewenberg, and A. Zohar, “Spectre: Seri-
vol. 33, pp. 33–113, 2017. alization of Proof-Of-Work Events: Confirming Transactions
[33] R. S. King, S. Williams, and D. Yanofsky, “By reading this via Recursive Elections,” Computer Science, 2017, https://www.
article, you’re mining bitcoins,” 2013, http://qz.com/154877/ semanticscholar.org/paper/SPECTRE-%3A-Serialization-of-Pr
by-reading-this-page-you-are-mining-bitcoins. oof-of-work-Events-%3A-Sompolinsky-Lewenberg/65f1613a4
[34] S. Azouvi and A. Hicks, “Sok: Tools for Game Theoretic f1b015fc64608b787227de0549f4cec.
Models of Security for Cryptocurrencies,” 2019, https://arxiv. [51] Y. Sompolinsky and A. Zohar, “Phantom,” IACR cryptology
org/abs/1905.08595. ePrint archive,” Report 2018/104, International Association
[35] Interpol, “Interpol holds first darknet and cryptocurrencies for Cryptologic Research, France, 2018.
working group,” 2018, https://www.interpol.int/Newsand-
Events/News/2018/INTERPOL-holds-first-DarkNet-and
Cryptocurrencies-Working-Group.
[36] G. Hileman, “State of Bitcoin and Blockchain 2016: Block-
chain Hits Critical Mass,” 2016, http://www.coindesk.com/
state-of-bitcoin-blockchain-2016.
[37] H. Albayati, S. K. Kim, and J. J. Rho, “Accepting financial
transactions using blockchain technology and crypto-
currency: a customer perspective approach,” Technology in
Society, vol. 62, Article ID 101320, 2020.
[38] D. W. McCloskey, “The importance of ease of use, usefulness,
and trust to online consumers,” Journal of Organizational and
End User Computing, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 47–65, 2006.
[39] D. H. McKnight, V. Choudhury, and C. Kacmar, “Developing
and validating trust measures for e-commerce: an integrative
typology,” Information Systems Research, vol. 13, no. 3,
pp. 334–359, 2002.
[40] R. Mcmillan, “The inside story of Mt. Gox, Bitcoin’s 460
Million Disaster,” 2014, https://www.wired.com/2014/03/
bitcoin-exchange/.
[41] P. W. Coopers, “Money Is No Object: Understanding the
Evolving Cryptocurrency Market,” 2015, https://www.pwc.
com/us/en/industries/financial-services/library/
cryptocurrency-evolution.html.
[42] R. Maull, P. Godsiff, C. Mulligan, A. Brown, and B. Kewell,
“Distributed ledger technology: applications and implica-
tions,” Strategic Change, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 481–489, 2017.
[43] R. Gendal-Brown, “On Distributed Databases and Distributed
Ledger,” 2017, https://gendal.me/2016/11/08/on distributed-
databases-and-distributed-ledgers/.
[44] E. D. Matemba and G. Li, “Consumers’ willingness to adopt and
use WeChat wallet: an empirical study in South Africa,”
Technology in Society, vol. 53, pp. 55–68, 2018, https://www.
sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160791X17302105.