Smart contracts are computer programs that can be correctly executed by a network of mutually distrusting nodes, without the need of an external trusted authority. Since smart contracts handle and transfer assets of considerable value, besides their correct execution it is also crucial that their implementation is secure against attacks which aim at stealing or tampering the assets. We study this problem in Ethereum, the most well-known and used framework for smart contracts so far. We analyse the security vulnerabilities of Ethereum smart contracts, providing a taxonomy of common programming pitfalls which may lead to vulnerabilities. We show a series of attacks which exploit these vulnerabilities, allowing an adversary to steal money or cause other damage.

A Survey of Attacks on Ethereum Smart Contracts SoK

/pdf/a-survey-of-attacks-on-ethereum-smart-contracts-43l3b2jez9.pdf

A survey of attacks on Ethereum smart contracts.

Permissionless blockchains allow the execution of arbitrary programs (called smart contracts), enabling mutually untrusted entities to interact without relying on trusted third parties. Despite their potential, repeated security concerns have shaken the trust in handling billions of USD by smart contracts. To address this problem, we present Securify, a security analyzer for Ethereum smart contracts that is scalable, fully automated, and able to prove contract behaviors as safe/unsafe with respect to a given property. Securify's analysis consists of two steps. First, it symbolically analyzes the contract's dependency graph to extract precise semantic information from the code. Then, it checks compliance and violation patterns that capture sufficient conditions for proving if a property holds or not. To enable extensibility, all patterns are specified in a designated domain-specific language. Securify is publicly released, it has analyzed >18K contracts submitted by its users, and is regularly used to conduct security audits by experts. We present an extensive evaluation of Securify over real-world Ethereum smart contracts and demonstrate that it can effectively prove the correctness of smart contracts and discover critical violations.

/pdf/securify-practical-security-analysis-of-smart-contracts-3m9isitgew.pdf

Securify: Practical Security Analysis of Smart Contracts

In recent years, the rapid development of cryptocurrencies and their underlying blockchain technology has revived Szabo’s original idea of smart contracts, i.e., computer protocols that are designed to automatically facilitate, verify, and enforce the negotiation and implementation of digital contracts without central authorities. Smart contracts can find a wide spectrum of potential application scenarios in the digital economy and intelligent industries, including financial services, management, healthcare, and Internet of Things, among others, and also have been integrated into the mainstream blockchain-based development platforms, such as Ethereum and Hyperledger. However, smart contracts are still far from mature, and major technical challenges such as security and privacy issues are still awaiting further research efforts. For instance, the most notorious case might be “The DAO Attack” in June 2016, which led to more than $50 million Ether transferred into an adversary’s account. In this paper, we strive to present a systematic and comprehensive overview of blockchain-enabled smart contracts, aiming at stimulating further research toward this emerging research area. We first introduced the operating mechanism and mainstream platforms of blockchain-enabled smart contracts, and proposed a research framework for smart contracts based on a novel six-layer architecture. Second, both the technical and legal challenges, as well as the recent research progresses, are listed. Third, we presented several typical application scenarios. Toward the end, we discussed the future development trends of smart contracts. This paper is aimed at providing helpful guidance and reference for future research efforts.

Blockchain-Enabled Smart Contracts: Architecture, Applications, and Future Trends

A smart contract is hard to patch for bugs once it is deployed, irrespective of the money it holds. A recent bug caused losses worth around $50 million of cryptocurrency. We present ZEUS—a framework to verify the correctness and validate the fairness of smart contracts. We consider correctness as adherence to safe programming practices, while fairness is adherence to agreed upon higher-level business logic. ZEUS leverages both abstract interpretation and symbolic model checking, along with the power of constrained horn clauses to quickly verify contracts for safety. We have built a prototype of ZEUS for Ethereum and Fabric blockchain platforms, and evaluated it with over 22.4K smart contracts. Our evaluation indicates that about 94.6% of contracts (containing cryptocurrency worth more than $0.5 billion) are vulnerable. ZEUS is sound with zero false negatives and has a low false positive rate, with an order of magnitude improvement in analysis time as compared to prior art.

/pdf/zeus-analyzing-safety-of-smart-contracts-174qkdf2tl.pdf

ZEUS: Analyzing Safety of Smart Contracts.

Ethereum is a framework for cryptocurrencies which uses blockchain technology to provide an open global computing platform, called the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM). EVM executes bytecode on a simple stack machine. Programmers do not usually write EVM code; instead, they can program in a JavaScript-like language, called Solidity, that compiles to bytecode. Since the main purpose of EVM is to execute smart contracts that manage and transfer digital assets (called Ether), security is of paramount importance. However, writing secure smart contracts can be extremely difficult: due to the openness of Ethereum, both programs and pseudonymous users can call into the public methods of other programs, leading to potentially dangerous compositions of trusted and untrusted code. This risk was recently illustrated by an attack on TheDAO contract that exploited subtle details of the EVM semantics to transfer roughly $50M worth of Ether into the control of an attacker.In this paper, we outline a framework to analyze and verify both the runtime safety and the functional correctness of Ethereum contracts by translation to F*, a functional programming language aimed at program verification.

/pdf/formal-verification-of-smart-contracts-short-paper-2iqup8hkn5.pdf

Formal Verification of Smart Contracts: Short Paper

We present EverCrypt: a comprehensive collection of verified, high-performance cryptographic functionalities available via a carefully designed API. The API provably supports agility (choosing between multiple algorithms for the same functionality) and multiplexing (choosing between multiple implementations of the same algorithm). Through abstraction and zero-cost generic programming, we show how agility can simplify verification without sacrificing performance, and we demonstrate how C and assembly can be composed and verified against shared specifications. We substantiate the effectiveness of these techniques with new verified implementations (including hashes, Curve25519, and AES-GCM) whose performance matches or exceeds the best unverified implementations. We validate the API design with two high-performance verified case studies built atop EverCrypt, resulting in line-rate performance for a secure network protocol and a Merkle-tree library, used in a production blockchain, that supports 2.7 million insertions/sec. Altogether, EverCrypt consists of over 124K verified lines of specs, code, and proofs, and it produces over 29K lines of C and 14K lines of assembly code.

/pdf/evercrypt-a-fast-verified-cross-platform-cryptographic-1nun9a3tkd.pdf

EverCrypt: A Fast, Verified, Cross-Platform Cryptographic Provider

We present a new methodology for building formally verified cryptographic libraries that are optimized for multiple architectures. In particular, we show how to write and verify generic crypto code in the F* programming language that exploits single-instruction multiple data (SIMD) parallelism. We show how this code can be compiled to platforms that support vector instructions, including ARM Neon and Intel AVX, AVX2, and AVX512. We apply our methodology to obtain verified vectorized implementations on all these platforms for the ChaCha20 encryption algorithm, the Poly1305 one-time MAC, and the SHA-2 and Blake2 families of hash algorithms. A distinctive feature of our approach is that we aggressively share code and verification effort between scalar and vectorized code, between vectorized code for different platforms, and between implementations of different cryptographic primitives. By doing so, we significantly reduce the manual effort needed to add new implementations to our verified library. In this paper, we describe our methodology and verification results, evaluate the performance of our code, and describe its integration into the HACL* crypto library. Our vectorized code has already been incorporated into several software projects, including the Firefox web browser.

https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/3372297.3423352

HACLxN: Verified Generic SIMD Crypto (for all your favourite platforms)

/pdf/hacl-n-verified-generic-simd-crypto-for-all-your-favorite-2118bgtokm.pdf

HACL×N: Verified Generic SIMD Crypto (for all your favorite platforms)

Cryptocurrencies have popularized public ledgers, known colloquially as “blockchains”. While the Bitcoin blockchain is relatively simple to reason about as, effectively, a hash chain, more complex public ledgers are largely designed without any formalization of desired cryptographic properties such as authentication or integrity. These designs are then implemented without assurances against real-world bugs leading to little assurance with regards to practical, real-world security. Ledger Design Language (LDL) is a modeling language for describing public ledgers. The LDL compiler produces two outputs. The first output is a an applied-pi calculus symbolic model representing the public ledger as a protocol. Using ProVerif, the protocol can be played against an active attacker, whereupon we can query for block integrity, authenticity and other properties. The second output is a formally verified read/write API for interacting with the public ledger in the real world, written in the F* programming language. F* features such as dependent types allow us to validate a block on the public ledger, for example, by type-checking it so that its signing public key be a point on a curve. Using LDL’s outputs, public ledger designers obtain automated assurances on the theoretical coherence and the real-world security of their designs with a single framework based on a single modeling language.

/pdf/ledger-design-language-designing-and-deploying-formally-1gio3i9q0o.pdf

Natalia Kulatova

Papers

Formal Verification of Smart Contracts: Short Paper

EverCrypt: A Fast, Verified, Cross-Platform Cryptographic Provider

HACLxN: Verified Generic SIMD Crypto (for all your favourite platforms)

HACL×N: Verified Generic SIMD Crypto (for all your favorite platforms)

Ledger design language: designing and deploying formally verified public ledgers