IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/gamebe/v148y2024icp566-610.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Tight incentive analysis of Sybil attacks against the market equilibrium of resource exchange over general networks

Author

Listed:
  • Cheng, Yukun
  • Deng, Xiaotie
  • Li, Yuhao
  • Yan, Xiang

Abstract

The BitTorrent network, a well-known Internet-scale P2P system, applies the proportional response protocol to exchange resource, where each participant contributes resource to neighbors in proportion to the amount it received in the previous round. The dynamics of this protocol is known to converge to a market equilibrium. However, an agent may manipulate this protocol by a Sybil attack to create fictitious identities and control them to gain more benefit. We apply the concept of incentive ratio, the percentage of the new utility after a Sybil attack over the benchmark, to measure the incentive of a strategic agent to play a Sybil attack, proving a tight bound of two over general networks. This finding completes the theoretical picture for incentive analysis on Sybil attacks facing the legendary tit-for-tat protocol for Internet bandwidth sharing and other applications.

Suggested Citation

  • Cheng, Yukun & Deng, Xiaotie & Li, Yuhao & Yan, Xiang, 2024. "Tight incentive analysis of Sybil attacks against the market equilibrium of resource exchange over general networks," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 566-610.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:148:y:2024:i:c:p:566-610
    DOI: 10.1016/j.geb.2024.10.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899825624001568
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.geb.2024.10.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cheung, Yun Kuen & Cole, Richard & Devanur, Nikhil R., 2020. "Tatonnement beyond gross substitutes? Gradient descent to the rescue," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 295-326.
    2. Yokoo, Makoto & Sakurai, Yuko & Matsubara, Shigeo, 2004. "The effect of false-name bids in combinatorial auctions: new fraud in internet auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 174-188, January.
    3. Juho Hamari & Mimmi Sjöklint & Antti Ukkonen, 2016. "The sharing economy: Why people participate in collaborative consumption," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(9), pages 2047-2059, September.
    4. Schummer, James, 2004. "Almost-dominant strategy implementation: exchange economies," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 154-170, July.
    5. Liad Wagman & Vincent Conitzer, 2014. "False-name-proof voting with costs over two alternatives," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 43(3), pages 599-618, August.
    6. Yukun Cheng & Xiaotie Deng & Qi Qi & Xiang Yan, 2023. "Truthfulness of a Network Resource-Sharing Protocol," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(3), pages 1522-1552, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pieper, Nadine & Woisetschläger, David M., 2024. "Customer misbehavior in access-based mobility services: An examination of prevention strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    2. Yu Wang & Shanyong Wang & Jing Wang & Jiuchang Wei & Chenglin Wang, 2020. "An empirical study of consumers’ intention to use ride-sharing services: using an extended technology acceptance model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 397-415, February.
    3. Serhat Burmaoglu & Ozcan Saritas, 2019. "An evolutionary analysis of the innovation policy domain: Is there a paradigm shift?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 823-847, March.
    4. Marina D. SIMONOVA & Irina P. MAMIY, 2019. "Online transport services market in Russia amid economy digitalization," Upravlenets, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 10(3), pages 94-103, July.
    5. Josué Ortega & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "Obvious manipulations in cake-cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 969-988, November.
    6. Lutz, Christoph & Newlands, Gemma, 2018. "Consumer segmentation within the sharing economy: The case of Airbnb," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 187-196.
    7. Joan Torrent-Sellens & Cristian Salazar-Concha & Pilar Ficapal-Cusí & Francesc Saigí-Rubió, 2021. "Using Digital Platforms to Promote Blood Donation: Motivational and Preliminary Evidence from Latin America and Spain," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(8), pages 1-17, April.
    8. Bruno Bruna & Faggini Marisa, 2020. "Sharing Competition: An Agent-Based Model for the Short-Term Accommodations Market," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 20(2), pages 1-13, April.
    9. Grzegorz Tchorek & Michał Brzozowski & Katarzyna Dziewanowska & Agnieszka Allen & Waldemar Kozioł & Michał Kurtyka & Filip Targowski, 2020. "Social Capital and Value Co-Creation: The Case of a Polish Car Sharing Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-20, June.
    10. Lucia Rotaris, 2021. "Carsharing Services in Italy: Trends and Innovations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-18, January.
    11. Daisy Bertrand & Pierre-Yves Léo & Jean Philippe, 2019. "The New Go-Between Services: Peer-To-Peer Sharing Platforms In Hospitality Services," Post-Print hal-02299130, HAL.
    12. Zuo, Wenming & Bai, Weijing & Zhu, Wenfeng & He, Xinming & Qiu, Xinxin, 2022. "Changes in service quality of sharing accommodation: Evidence from airbnb," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    13. Vincenzo Vignieri, 2021. "Crowdsourcing as a mode of open innovation: Exploring drivers of success of a multisided platform through system dynamics modelling," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(1), pages 108-124, January.
    14. Mengelkamp, Esther & Schönland, Thomas & Huber, Julian & Weinhardt, Christof, 2019. "The value of local electricity - A choice experiment among German residential customers," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 294-303.
    15. POPSA Elena-Roxana, 2019. "Sharing Economy - A Challenge For The Hotel Industry. Case Study: Airbnb," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 71(2), pages 118-129, September.
    16. Puiu Andreea-Ionela, 2020. "Motivations of Young Consumers to Participate to Collaborative Consumption," Journal of Social and Economic Statistics, Sciendo, vol. 9(2), pages 43-55, December.
    17. Forscher, Teddy & Deakin, Elizabeth PhD & Walker, Joan PhD & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2021. "Who Has Access to E-Commerce During the COVID-19 Pandemic in the Sacramento Region? Implications for Future E-Commerce and Shopping Tripmaking," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6mx0w7hj, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    18. Geissinger, Andrea & Laurell, Christofer & Sandström, Christian, 2020. "Digital Disruption beyond Uber and Airbnb—Tracking the long tail of the sharing economy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    19. Ubaid Ullah Khan & Yousaf Ali & Mónika Garai-Fodor & Ágnes Csiszárik-Kocsir, 2023. "Application of Project Management Techniques for Timeline and Budgeting Estimates of Startups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(21), pages 1-18, November.
    20. Cicognani, Simona & Romagnoli, Giorgia & Soraperra, Ivan, 2024. "Fostering trust: When the rhetoric of sharing can backfire," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:gamebe:v:148:y:2024:i:c:p:566-610. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622836 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.