ExplorerComputer ScienceCybersecurity
Research PaperResearchia:202607.02008

All-out Attack: Optimal Block Withholding Under Pay-Per-Share Scheme

Mustafa Doger

Abstract

Classical Block Withholding (BWH) attacks have been extensively studied in block-dependent reward schemes, where pool members are compensated upon a block discovery within the pool. However, most contemporary mining pools operate under share-based scheme wherein participants are paid immediately upon submission of valid shares. In this paper, we analyze BWH under Pay-Per-Share (PPS) and Full-PPS (FPPS) schemes for Nakamoto-style blockchains and prove that these mechanisms are not incentive compa...

Submitted: July 2, 2026Subjects: Cybersecurity; Computer Science

Description / Details

Classical Block Withholding (BWH) attacks have been extensively studied in block-dependent reward schemes, where pool members are compensated upon a block discovery within the pool. However, most contemporary mining pools operate under share-based scheme wherein participants are paid immediately upon submission of valid shares. In this paper, we analyze BWH under Pay-Per-Share (PPS) and Full-PPS (FPPS) schemes for Nakamoto-style blockchains and prove that these mechanisms are not incentive compatible -- contrary to claims in prior literature. Under PPS/FPPS, the optimal strategy for a BWH attacker is the All-out Attack (AoA): the adversary allocates its entire hashpower toward the victim pool, submitting only partial Proof-of-Work shares (pPoW) while withholding all valid blocks, i.e., full Proof-of-Work (fPoW). Under AoA, prior to the first difficulty adjustment, the adversary incurs negligible loss due to the withheld fPoWs. After the first difficulty adjustment, which reduces block difficulty, the adversary generates more pPoWs per unit time, achieving a relative gain of α1α\fracα{1-α} compared to pre-adjustment rates, where αα is the fraction of adversarial hashpower. Moreover, per unit time and per unit hashpower, all honest miners benefit at the same rate as the adversary. In contrast, the victim pool operator incurs losses: it pays the attacker out-of-pocket for pPoW submissions but receives no fPoW compensation in return. Finally, advanced variants of BWH, such as Fork After Withholding (FAW), do not yield additional profit to the attacker.


Source: arXiv:2607.01209v1 - http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01209v1 PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2607.01209v1 Original Link: http://arxiv.org/abs/2607.01209v1

Please sign in to join the discussion.

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!

Access Paper
View Source PDF
Submission Info
Date:
Jul 2, 2026
Topic:
Computer Science
Area:
Cybersecurity
Comments:
0
Bookmark