Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies Lecture 1&2 Notes

This notes is written as my personal lecture notes taken down from the awesome lecture “Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Technologies” provided by Princeton University on Coursera. Hope you guys find it helpful in your learning!

Grab the PDF version if you want better readability or archive!

Lecture 1 Basic Cryptography related

Part 1 Hash function

Hash function:

  • Takes any string as input
  • fixed-size output (256bits is what we use)
  • efficiently computable

    Security Properties of Hash function

  • collision-free

    • Idea: Nobody can find a pair $x,y$ s.t. $x \neq y$ yet $Hash(x) = Hash(y)$
    • Collisions do exist
      • Easy to illustrate, take our 256 bits hash function as example: there are only $2^{256}$ outputs and undefined arbitrarily large amount of input strings. There has to be collisions.
    • So the key is to avoid regular people to find these collisions
    • Ways to find collisions
      • Try $2^{130}$ randomly chosen inputs, there are $99.8\%$ chance that two of them collide. But this takes too long to matter.
    • No hash functions up to now has been proven to be collision-free, it’s just too hard to find a collision so we believe it as collision-free
    • Application of collision-free: Hash as message digest
      • If we know $H(x) = H(y)$, we can say $x=y$ as we believe $H$ is collision-free
      • So we can use it as a tool to compare large objects like files. Instead of comparing the whole file, we can just compare their hash which is significantly smaller. (In fact, md5 is used to verify file integrity)
  • hiding

    • Given $H(x)$, it is infeasible to find $x$.

    • No value of $x$ that is particularly likely. Set of value $x$ has to be very sparse.

    • Concatenate $x$ with another value $r$ which is from a very sparse set (or $r$ is chosen from a probability distribution that has high min-entrophy) to sovle this problem.
      High min-entropy means that the distribution is very spread out, so that no particular value is chosen with more than negligible probability.

      Then given $H(r \mid x)$, it is infeasible to find $x$.

    • Application: Commitment

      (com, key) := commit(msg)
      match := verify(com, key, msg)
      To seal msg in envelope:
      (com, key) := commit(msg) #then publish com
      To open envelope:
      publish key, msg
      anyone can use verify to check its validity
      commit(msg) := (H(key|msg), key) where key is a random 256-bit value
      verify(com, key, msg) := (H(key|msg) == com)
      #To have such security properties:
      Hiding: given (H(key|msg), infeasible to find msg
      Binding: Infeasible to find msg != msg' s.t. that (H(key|msg) == H(key|msg')
  • puzzle-friendly

    • For every possible output value $y$, if $k$ is chosen from a distribution with high min-entropy, then it is infeasible to find $x$ s.t. $H(k\mid x) = y$

    • Application: Search puzzle

      Given a 'puzzle ID' id(from high min-entropy distrib) and a targe set Y, try to find a 'solution' x s.t. H(id | x) in Y.

Example: SHA-256 hash function


Algo walkthrough:

  1. Take the original message and divide it up in chunks of 512bits​ size. The last block is padded with how many bits are there in the block and 0s to fill it up to 512bits​.
  2. After the message is partitioned, we take the IV key which is a 256bits string and concatenate with the first chunk of message block_1 to be a 768bits message chunk.
  3. Run this message chunk thru the compression algorithm c to produce a new 256bits key and pass into the next execution with message block_2
  4. Repeat until no blocks left; return hash.

Th. If c is collision-free, then SHA-256 is collsiion free.

Part 2 Hash pointers

Hash pointer

  • Pointer to where some info is stored
  • and cryptographic hash of the info
  • just like normal pointers, but not only where it is stored but also the hash of its data

With hash pointer, we can

  • ask to get the info back
  • certify that it hasn’t changed

Key idea: Build data structure with hash pointers

Example: Linkedlist with Hash pointers (blockchain)ll_hashpointers

  • we can build temper-evident log (If someone mess with data earlier we can detect it)

Example: binary tree with hash pointers (Merkle tree)

merkle tree

  • Advantages:
    • Holds many items but only need to remember the root hash
    • Can verify membership in $O(\log n)$ time
  • Variant: sorted Merkle tree (binary search tree with hash pointers)
    • can verify non-membership in $O(\log n)$ time (Prove nothing in between)


  • Can use hash pointers in any pointer-based data structure that has not cycles

Part 3 Digital Signatures

Features of Signatures

  • Only you can sign, but anyone can verify
  • Signature is tied to particular document; can’t be copy-and-pasted to another document

API for digital signatures

(sk, pk) := generateKeys(keysize)
sig := sign(sk, message)
isValid := verify(pk, message, sig)

Requirements for signatures

  • Valid signatures verify

    verify(pk, message, sign(sk,message)) == true

  • Can’t forge signatures

    • Adversary who
      • knows pk
      • gets to see signatures on messages of his choice
    • can’t produce a verifiable signature on another message

Practical stuff

  • Algorithms are randomized
    • good source of randomness required
  • Limit on message isze
    • fix: use Hash(message) rather than message
  • Fun trick: sign a hash pointer
    • signatures covers the whole structure (sign the entire content)
  • Bitcoins uses ECDSA(Elliptic Curve Digital Signature Algorithm) standard
    • relies on extremely complicated maths
    • good randomness is extremely essential for ECDSA

Part 4 Public Keys as Identities

Useful trick: pulic key == an identity

  • if you see sig s.t. verify(pk, msg, sig) == true ,

    In order to speak as pk, you need to have the matching private key sk.

How to make a new identity

  • create a new random key-pair (sk, pk)
  • pk is the pubic “name” you can use, normally H(pk) as pk is large
  • sk let’s you speak as pk
  • you control the identity because only you know sk
  • if pk looks random, nobody needs to know who you are

Decentralized identity management

  • No need to use username, etc
  • anyone can make a new identity anytime and make as many as wanted
  • no central point of coordination
  • these identities are called address or wallet_address in Bitcoin

Privacy (how private it is)

  • Addresses not directly connected to real-word identity
  • But observer can link together an address’s activity over time, make inferences
  • Will talk this later

Part 5 A simple Cryptocurrency

Goofy Coin: Simplest Cryptocurrency


  • Goofy can create new coins that belongs to him


    CreateCoin[uuid] singed by pk_goof

  • A coin’s owner can spend it


    • make a statement pay to pk_alice with hash pointer signed by pk_goofy
  • The recipient can pass on the coin again



double-spending attack (one of the major design challenges)

double-spending attack

  • both Bob and Chuck has a valid claim on the coin

Scrooge Coin


  • on top of goofy coin

  • Scrooge publishes a history of all transactions(a blockchain signed by Scrooge)


  • Optimization: put multiple transactions in the same block

  • Now everyone can detect double-spending

  • New CreateCoins transaction

    createCoins transaction

  • New PayCoin transaction:


    • consumes some coins and creates new coins of the same total value
    • Valid if
      • consumed coins valid
      • not already consumed
      • total value out = total value in
      • signed by owners of all consumed coins
  • New Immutable Coin

    • Coins can’t be transferred, subdivided, or combined
    • But you can achieve the same effect by using transactions to subdivide
      • Create new trans that consume your coin and pay out two new coins to yourself with a same total value

Problem: Centralization

  • Scrooge can be misbehaving

  • Scrooge have to operate his functions all the time

  • how to operate without any central, trusted party

  • Problems to solve:

    If we can solve all of these problems, then we can build a currency that is very much like BitCoin. Which is like ScroogeCoin but without a centralized party.

    • How everyone can agree upon a single published block chain that is the agreed upon history which transactions have happened?
    • How people can agree which transactions are valid and which transactions have actually occurred?
    • How we can assign IDs to things in a decentralized way?

Assignment: Scrooge Coin’s public ledger

Lecture 2 How Bitcoin achieves Decentralization

Part 1 Centralization vs. Decentralization

Decentralization is not “all-or-nothing”

  • Email: Decentralized protocol (smtp), but dominated by centralized webmail services(gmail, outlook).

Questions to answer about decentralization in Bitcoin

  • Who maintains the ledger?
  • Who has authority over which transactions are valid?
  • Who creates new bitcoins?
  • Who determines how the rules of the system change?
  • How do bitcoins acquire exchange value?
  • Beyond the protocol:
    • Exchanges
    • Wallet software
    • Service providers

Aspects of decentralization in Bitcoin

  • P2P (Peer-to-Peer) Network

    Open to anyone, low barrier to entry

  • Mining

    Open to anyone, but inevitable concentration of power often seen as undesirable.

    Mainly due to the computing resource required to solve hard computational problem

  • Updates to software

    Core developers trusted by community, they have a lot of power

Part 2 Distributed Consensus

Bitcoin’s key challenge: Distributed Consensus

Why consensus protocols?

  • Traditional motivation: reliability in distributed systems.

    e.g. Possible database inconsistency issue

  • Distributed K-V store: enables various applications like

    DNS, public key directory, stock trades

Defining Distributed Consensus

  • The protocol terminates
  • All correct nodes decide on same value
  • This value must have been proposed by some correct nodes

Bitcoin is a peer-to-peer system


  • When Alice wants to pay Bob:
    She broadcasts the transaction to all Bitcoin nodes
    • Alice’s Signature
    • Bob’s pubkey
    • Hash: hash pointer to the “history” of this coin
  • Bob’s computer is not in the picture
    • bitcoin is his no matter if he knows
  • Order of transaction sequence
  • Which nodes receive the broadcast

How consensus “could“ work in Bitcoin


At any given time:

  • All nodes have a sequence of blocks of transactions they’ve reached consensus on.
  • Each node has a set of outstanding transactions it’s heard about

Why consensus is hard (technically)

  • Nodes may crash

  • Nodes may be malicious

  • Network is imperfect

    • Not all pairs of nodes connected
    • Faults in network
    • Latency
      • No notion of global time
      • Not all nodes can agree to order of events by looking at timestamps, can’t determine which transaction happens first
  • Many impossibility results

  • Well-known protocols to solve this problems

    • Paxos
      • Never produces inconsistent result
      • Can (rarely) get stuck, fail to make any progress
  • Understanding impossibility results

    • These tests are developed around the concept of distributed databases, not necessarily bitcoin
  • Bitcoin consensus works better in practice than in theory
  • Theory is still catching up
  • But theory is important as it can help predict unforeseen attacks

Some things Bitcoin does differently

Bitcoin does not quite solve Distributed Consensus Problem in a general sense, but solves it in the context of a currency system.

  • Introduces incentives
    • Possible only because it’s a currency
  • Embraces randomness
    • Does away with the notion of a specific end-point
    • Consensus happens over long time scales — about 1 hour
      • But even at the end of that time, you’re not a 100% sure that a transaction or a block that you’re interested in has made it into the consensus block chain. Instead, as time goes on, your probability goes up higher and higher. And the probability that you’re wrong in making an assumption about a transaction goes down exponentially.
      • So that’s the kind of inherently probabilistic guarantee that Bitcoin gives you. And that’s why it’s able to completely get around these traditional impossibility results on distributed consensus protocols.

Part 3 Consensus without Identity: the Block Chain

Why identity?

  • Pragmatic: some protocols need node IDs
  • Security: assume less than 50% malicious

Why don’t Bitcoin nodes have identities?

  • Identity is hard in a P2P system — Sybil attack
  • Pseudonymity is a goal of Bitcoin

Weaker Assumption: select random node

  • Analogy: lottery or raffle
  • When tracking & verifying identities is hard, we give people tokens. tickets, etc
  • Now we can pick a random ID & select that node

Key idea: implicit consensus

  • In each round ,random node is picked
  • This node proposed the next block in the chain
  • Other nodes implicitly accept/reject this block
    • by either extending it
    • or ignoring it and extending the chain from earlier block
  • Recall every block contains hash of the block it extends

Bitcoin consensus algorithm (simplified)

  • New transactions are broadcast to all nodes
  • Each node collects new transactions into a block
  • In each round, a random node gets to broadcast its block
  • Other nodes accept the block only if all transactions in it are valid(unspent, valid signatures)
  • Nodes express their acceptance of the block by including its hash in the next block they create

Why this works by looking at what can a malicious node do?

  • Attackers can’t steal bitcoins belong to others.

    As she can’t forge their signatures. As long as the crypto is solid, this is impossible.

  • Attacker can deny service to some user.

    But this is minor as nodes are selected at random to propose its block. Some honest node will propose its correct block sometime afterwards.

  • Attackers can start double-spending attacks.

How to prevent double spending in blockchain?

A valid transaction

Suppose this is Alice is buying some merchant from merchant Bob and the payment is done with Bitcoin.

A valid transaction could look like this:


  • Alice is paying Bob with a bitcoin $C_A$ signed by Alice and paid to the merchant Bob’s public key(address)
  • There are actually at least two types of pointers in this graph
    • The Hash pointer from a block to its previous block indicating where it extends from
    • The Hash pointer of this coin/transaction to its previous transaction(where the coin came from)
      • Recall Bitcoin is represented by a transaction
      • Intuitively, a coin has a log of how it’s transferred around the network
  • There’s also a third pointer in this graph called Merkle Trace which we are not discussing right now.

This is the blockchain right now. So as far as Bob is concerned, he saw the transaction is completed and added to the chain, he may allow Alice to receive her goods in exchange for her bitcoin payment. But this opens up vulnerability to double-spending attack.

A double-spending attack


  • If by random, Alice get to propose the next block; Alice could propose a new block that looks like above.
    • Ignore altogether the valid block on that contains the transaction to Bob.
    • And instead, contains a pointer to the previous block instead a pointer to the valid block.
    • In addition, it contains a transaction that has a transfer of coins, from Alice but not to Bob. Instead, it transfers to A' which is another address controlled by Alice.
  • This is a classic double spending pattern.
    • What is going on here, is Alice now creates a new transaction that transfers that coin, instead of to Bob’s address, to another address owned by her.
    • This is a completely different transaction, also with the same Hash Pointer going back to the same transaction referred earlier in the transaction to Bob.

How do we know if this double-spending attack is going to succeed or not?

  • Depends on which one of the green transaction and the red transaction is going to end up in the long-term consensus chain.

  • Consensus Rule for honest nodes: Honest node always follow the policy of extending the longest valid branch.

  • From a moral point of view, the green on is definitely the longest valid branch for other nodes to follow.

  • However, from a technical perspective, these two transactions are completely identical in validity. The nodes really have no way to tell which one is the “legitimate” transaction. (“legitimate” here is a moral judgement that we apply to it, so it’s not a technical distinction)

  • Nodes often follow a heuristic of extending the block that they first heard about on the peer-to-peer network, but it’s not a solid rule. And in any case, because of network latency, that could easily be the other way around.

  • So if Alice get to propose the block contains the red transaction, it could get included into the consensus chain and becomes the longest valid chain. Even if some other node gets to propose, she could potentially hack/bribe to achieve her goals.

    successful double spending attack

  • So if Alice succeeded, her branch becomes the longest valid branch. Honest nodes will be more likely to add more blocks to Alice's branch and it will become more and more valid.

    At this point, Alice has succeeded her double spending attack. Her fraudulent transaction is successfully buried deep in the consensus chain.

How a Merchant like Bob can prevent this?

merchant's perspective

  • From Bob’s perspective he could confirm the transaction is successful on different circumstances.

    1. He could confirm the transaction as long as it gets broadcasted. This is more foolhardy than our example above. This is called 0 confirmations.

    2. He could wait along and wait for 1 block with the successful legit transaction to be added to the consensus chain. This is called 1 confirmations.

    3. He could wait even longer, like 3 confirmations. Because the node to propose is selected at random. It’s incredibly hard for Alice to build a faulty chain with the same length as the legit chain. She would have to possess more and more malicious nodes to make her chain even 1 block longer.

    4. Based on the sense that

      • most nodes are honest the fact
      • longer the chain is after the green transaction, harder to produce fraudulent chain

      The double-spend probability decreases exponentially with number of confirmations.

      • The most common heuristic among the bitcoin community agrees upon 6 confirmations as being enough.
      • There is nothing really special about the number six. It’s just a good trade-off between the amount of time you have to wait and your guarantee that the transaction you’re interested in ends up on the consensus block chain.


  • Protection against invalid transactions is cryptographic, but enforced by consensus.
  • Protection against double-spending is purely by consensus. Cryptography has nothing to say about this.
  • You are never 100% sure that a transaction that you’re interested in is on the consensus branch. But this exponential probability guarantee is pretty good. After about six transactions, there’s virtually no chance that you’re gonna go wrong.

Part 4 Incentives and Proof of Work

Assumption of honesty is problematic

  • Nodes have financial incentives to subvert the protocols for their own gains

  • Can we give nodes incentives to behave honestly?


    • Penalize nodes that create problematic blocks?
      • Nodes don’t have identity, no way to chase them and penalize
    • Can we reward nodes that create valid blocks?
      • Yes.

Incentives in Bitcoin

Incentive 1: Block reward

Creator of block gets to

  • include special coin-creation transaction in the block

  • choose recipient address of this transaction

  • Value is fixed: currently 25 BTC, halves every 4 years (currently phase 2)

  • Bitcoin supply

    Bitcoin Supply

    • The slope of the supply curve halts every 4 years
    • This ends up as a geometric sequence with a final finite sum
    • Bitcoin is only created this way(reward for building new blocks that ends up in the consensus chain)

Block creator gets to “collect” their rewards only if their block ends up on the long-term consensus branch. (The coin creation transaction is only valid if it ends up on the long-term consensus branch)

Incentive 2: Transaction value

  • Creator of transaction can choose to make the output value less than input value
  • Remainder is a transaction fee and goes to block creator
  • Purely voluntary, like a tip
  • How the environment will evolve is interesting game theory

Remaining problems

  1. How to pick a truly random node?
  2. How to avoid a free-for-all due to rewards? (Everyone runs a block try to get the block creation reward)
  3. How to prevent Sybil attacks?

One same solution to these remaining problems?

To approximate selecting a random node:

  • select nodes in proportion to a resource that no one can monopolize(we hope)

Resource choices:

  • Select a node in proportion to computing power: proof-of-work
  • Select a node in proportion to ownership of the currency: proof-of-stake

Proof-of-work (Intentions)

  • Allow nodes to compete with each other with their computing power, result in nodes automatically getting picked in proportion to their computing power
  • Make it moderately hard to create new identities(nodes)

Hash puzzles


  • To create block, it is required to find a nonce s.t.
  • H(nonce|prev_hash|tx|tx|....|tx) is in a very small subset of the entire output space of the hash function
  • Therefore, if our hash function is secure enough: only way to succeed is to try enough nonces until you get lucky.
  • Thus we made it moderately difficult to create new blocks.
  • Completely does away with the requirement for somebody somehow to pick a random node.
  • Instead, nodes are simply all the time independently competing to solve this puzzle. Once in a while, some node will get lucky and find a valid nonce and that node gets to propose the next block.

PoW properties

Property 1: difficult to compute

  • As of Aug 2014: about $10^{20}$ hashes per block, this is a humongous number
  • So only some nodes bother to compete — miners

Property 2: parametrizable cost

  • Nodes automatically recalculates the target space of PoW every two weeks based on the entire network’s global computing power s.t. a fixed rate output of blocks
  • Goal: Average time between block creations = 10 minutes, a efficiency concern
  • Prob(alice wins next block) = fraction of global hash power she controls
  • Key security assumption: Attacks infeasible if majority of miners weighted by hash power follow the protocol (aka honest)

    hash_puzzle distribution

Property 3: trivial to verify

  • nonce must be published as part of the block
  • So other miners can verify that H(nonce|prev_hash|tx|tx|....|tx) in target

Part 5 Putting It All Together

Mining Economics


  • Fixed vs. variable costs
  • Reward depends on global hash rate
  • Also exchange value of rewarded bitcoin in terms of dollars for example is fluctuating
  • Whether profitable is a very complicated game theory problem


  • Identities:
    • Any time any user can make any number of pseudonymous key pair as identities.
  • Transactions:
    • Basically messages that are broadcast to the bitcoin p2p network.
    • Which are instructions to transfer a coin from one address to another.
  • Coin:
    • Really is just a chain of transactions.
  • P2P network:
    • Goal: propagate all new transactions to all the Bitcoin peer nodes as well as new blocks to the Bitcoin peer nodes.
    • The real security of the system doesn’t come from the perfection of the P2P network.
    • Nevertheless, the underlying assumption is that the network is quite unreliable.
    • Security comes from blockchain and consensus protocol.
  • Block chain & consensus Protocol
    • Your transaction to be in the block chain is that it achieves a lot of confirmations.
    • It’s not a fixed number, 6 is a commonly used heuristic, but the more confirmations your transaction has received, the more blocks are found that extend the block that contained your transaction, the more certain you can be that your transaction was part of the consensus chain.
    • A variety of orphan blocks, blocks that don’t make it to the consensus chain. Can be interpreted as different possibilities:
      • An invalid transaction
      • A double-spend attempt
      • A network latency residue (t could simply represent the fact that there is latency in the network, and two miners competing to solve this proof of work puzzle. Simply ended up finding new blocks within just a few seconds of each other. And, so both of these blocks were broadcast nearly simultaneously onto the network. )
  • Hash puzzles & mining
    • So another subtle point here is that if Alice and Bob were two different miners, and Alice has 100 times as much computing power as Bob. What that means is, not that Alice will always win the race against Bob to find the next block, but instead, Alice and Bob have a ratio, a probability ratio, of finding the next block in the proportion 100 to 1. So in the long term Bob will find, on average, 1% of the blocks that Alice does.
    • Miners are a special type of nodes that bother to compete in this game of creating new blocks and they’re rewarded for their efforts in terms of Bitcoins.
    • And we expect that miners are going to be typically somewhere near the economic equilibrium of the expenditure that they incur, in terms of hardware and electricity, being somewhere equal to the rewards that they obtain in terms of the new block creation reward and the transaction fee based rewards.

Bitcoin has three types of consensus

  • Value
    • Like exchange rate in fiat currencies
  • State (blockchain)
    • Which transaction are valid
    • Which transaction actually happened
    • Ownership of bitcoin is based on consensus (other nodes think someone owns it)
  • Rules (of the system)
    • When the rule of system needs to change
    • Soft forks
    • Hard forks

Bitcoin is bootstrapped


  • Let’s start from the security of the block chain. So obviously we want the block chain to be secure for Bitcoin to be a viable currency. But, what is necessary for the block chain to be secure? What this means is that an adversary shouldn’t be able to overwhelm the consensus process. Shouldn’t be able to create a lot of nodes and take over 50% or more of the new block creation.
  • But a prerequisite for that is a healthy mining ecosystem made up of largely honest protocol following nodes. So that’s a prerequisite for security of the block chain.
  • But miners are only incentivized to mining if the exchange rate of Bitcoin is pretty high.
  • But what ensures a high and stable value of the currency? That can only happen if, users in general, people who want to buy Bitcoins, have trust in the security of the block chain. Because if they believe that the network could be overwhelmed at any moment by an attacker then Bitcoin is not going to have a lot of value as a currency.
  • So there is this interlocking interdependence between these three things.

What can a “51% attacker”(Consensus Suberter) do?

  • Steal coins from existing address?
    • Not possible.
      • Even if the invalid branch makes it self the longest branch. Honest nodes will not approve and keep on mining valid blocks.
      • Creating a fork in blockchain.
      • A merchant running a honest node can simply ignore the longest branch as it contains a invalid transaction. (crypto and signature don’t checkout)
    • Only if subverting both consensus and cryptography will succeed.
  • Suppress soem transactions?
    • From the blockchain
      • Possible
        • Since he controls the consensus, he can skimpy refuse any new blocks contain that transaction
        • also refuse build upon blocks that contain such transactions.
    • From the P2P network
      • Impossible
        • Assume the attacker doesn’t fully control the network, can’t prevent transaction being broadcasted to the network
  • Change the block reward (Rule of the system)
    • Impossible
    • Doesn’t control the source software every node is using.
  • Destroy the confidence of Bitcoin
    • Possible
    • Main practical attack

Remaining questions

  • How do we get from consensus to currency?
  • What else can we do with consensus?
大佬请我喝维他柠檬茶吧 Buy me some Vita lemon tea!