Collusion in Peer-to-Peer Systems

Peer-to-peer systems have reached a widespread use, ranging from academic and industrial applications to home entertainment. The key advantage of this paradigm lies in its scalability and flexibility, consequences of the participants sharing their resources for the common welfare. Security in such systems is a desirable goal. For example, when mission-critical operations or bank transactions are involved, their effectiveness strongly depends on the perception that users have about the system dependability and trustworthiness. A major threat to the security of these systems is the phenomenon of collusion. Peers can be selfish colluders, when they try to fool the system to gain unfair advantages over other peers, or malicious, when their purpose is to subvert the system or disturb other users. The problem, however, has received so far only a marginal attention by the research community. While several solutions exist to counter attacks in peer-to-peer systems, very few of them are meant to directly counter colluders and their attacks. Reputation, micro-payments, and concepts of game theory are currently used as the main means to obtain fairness in the usage of the resources. Our goal is to provide an overview of the topic by examining the key issues involved. We measure the relevance of the problem in the current literature and the effectiveness of existing philosophies against it, to suggest fruitful directions in the further development of the field

Blockchain and Smart Contract for Peer-to-Peer Energy Trading Platform: Legal Obstacles and Regulatory Solutions, 19 UIC REV. INTELL. PROP. L. 285 (2020)

This paper discusses the implications of smart contracts in energy trading for the protection of consumer and individual rights. It examines the legal risks and regulatory solutions for a peer-to-peer energy trading platform (P2P-ETP) in creating a sustainable energy ecosystem. Part I discusses the conceptual framework of P2PETP, which enables consumers to become energy ‘producers\u27 and traders. Smart technologies—smart contracts, smart meters, and distributed ledger technology (DLT) platforms, are the main components of this platform. The study examines the legal basis for these components. Part II analyzes the legal uncertainty of the smart contract, such as its enforceability, and the inadequate protection for consumers and their individual rights through price manipulation, violation of rights to privacy, and data breaches. Part III discusses the potential policy implementations and the principles behind a legal and regulatory framework for establishing a trusted peer-to peer energy trading platform

Sustainable Development Report: Blockchain, the Web3 & the SDGs

This is an output paper of the applied research that was conducted between July 2018 - October 2019 funded by the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) and conducted by the Research Institute for Cryptoeconomics at the Vienna University of Economics and Business and RCE Vienna (Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development).Series: Working Paper Series / Institute for Cryptoeconomics / Interdisciplinary Researc

Sustainable Development Report: Blockchain, the Web3 & the SDGs

This is an output paper of the applied research that was conducted between July 2018 - October 2019 funded by the Austrian Development Agency (ADA) and conducted by the Research Institute for Cryptoeconomics at the Vienna University of Economics and Business and RCE Vienna (Regional Centre of Expertise on Education for Sustainable Development).Series: Working Paper Series / Institute for Cryptoeconomics / Interdisciplinary Researc

Conversations on a probable future: interview with Beatrice Fazi

No description supplie

Regulating Online Peer-to-Peer Lending in the Aftermath of Dodd–Frank: In Search of an Evolving Regulatory Regime for an Evolving Industry

The 2010 Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act called for a government study of the regulatory options for on-line Peer-to-Peer lending. On-line P2P sites, most notably for-profit sites Prosper.com and LendingClub.com, offer individual “investors” the chance to lend funds to individual “borrowers.” The sites promise lower interest rates for borrowers and high rates of return for investors. In addition to the media attention such sites have generated, they also raise significant regulatory concerns on both the state and federal level. The Government Accountability Office report produced in response to the Dodd–Frank Act failed to make a strong recommendation between two primary regulatory options—a multi-faceted regulatory approach in which different federal and state agencies would exercise authority over different aspects of on-line P2P lending, or a single-regulator approach, in which a single agency (most likely the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau) would be given total regulatory control over on-line P2P lending. After discussing the origins of on-line P2P lending, its particular risks, and its place in the broader context of non-commercial lending, this paper argues in favor of a multi-agency regulatory approach for online P2P that mirrors the approach used to regulate traditional lending