The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Hijacking Bitcoin: Routing Attacks on Cryptocurrencies
Abstract
As the most successful cryptocurrency to date, Bitcoin constitutes a target of choice for attackers. While many attack vectors have already been uncovered, one important vector has been left out though: attacking the currency via the Internet routing infrastructure itself. Indeed, by manipulating routing advertisements (BGP hijacks) or by naturally intercepting traffic, Autonomous Systems (ASes) can intercept and manipulate a large fraction of Bitcoin traffic. This paper presents the first taxonomy of routing attacks and their impact on Bitcoin, considering both small-scale attacks, targeting individual nodes, and large-scale attacks, targeting the network as a whole. While challenging, we show that two key properties make routing attacks practical: (i) the efficiency of routing manipulation; and (ii) the significant centralization of Bitcoin in terms of mining and routing. Specifically, we find that any network attacker can hijack few (<;100) BGP prefixes to isolate ~50% of the mining power-even when considering that mining pools are heavily multi-homed. We also show that on-path network attackers can considerably slow down block propagation by interfering with few key Bitcoin messages. We demonstrate the feasibility of each attack against the deployed Bitcoin software. We also quantify their effectiveness on the current Bitcoin topology using data collected from a Bitcoin supernode combined with BGP routing data. The potential damage to Bitcoin is worrying. By isolating parts of the network or delaying block propagation, attackers can cause a significant amount of mining power to be wasted, leading to revenue losses and enabling a wide range of exploits such as double spending. To prevent such effects in practice, we provide both short and long-term countermeasures, some of which can be deployed immediately.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
P4: programming protocol-independent packet processors
Bosshart, P., Daly, D., Gibb, G., Izzard, M., McKeown, N., Rexford, J., Schlesinger, C., Talayco, D., Vahdat, A., Varghese, G., et al. (2014) · ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review · doi:10.1145/2656877.2656890 · Cited by 2,867
Zerocash: Decentralized Anonymous Payments from Bitcoin
Ben Sasson, E., Chiesa, A., Garman, C., Green, M., Miers, I., Tromer, E., & Virza, M. (2014) · 2014 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/sp.2014.36 · Cited by 1,925
The Bitcoin Backbone Protocol: Analysis and Applications
Garay, J., Kiayias, A., & Leonardos, N. (2015) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46803-6_10 · Cited by 1,366
SoK: Research Perspectives and Challenges for Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies
Bonneau, J., Miller, A., Clark, J., Narayanan, A., Kroll, J. A., & Felten, E. W. (2015) · 2015 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy · doi:10.1109/sp.2015.14 · Cited by 1,246
Information propagation in the Bitcoin network
Decker, C., & Wattenhofer, R. (2013) · IEEE P2P 2013 Proceedings · doi:10.1109/p2p.2013.6688704 · Cited by 1,192
A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4)
Rekhter, Y., & Li, T. (1995) · doi:10.17487/rfc1771 · Cited by 892
Secure High-Rate Transaction Processing in Bitcoin
Sompolinsky, Y., & Zohar, A. (2015) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-47854-7_32 · Cited by 693
Self-citationEclipse attacks on Bitcoin's peer-to-peer network
Heilman, E., Kendler, A., Zohar, A., & Goldberg, S. (2015) · Cited by 585
Self-citationThe Economics of Bitcoin Mining, or Bitcoin in the Presence of Adversaries
Kroll, J. A., Davey, I. C., & Felten, E. W. (2013) · Cited by 514
Stubborn Mining: Generalizing Selfish Mining and Combining with an Eclipse Attack
Nayak, K., Kumar, S., Miller, A., & Shi, E. (2016) · 2016 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P) · doi:10.1109/eurosp.2016.32 · Cited by 481
Cited by
A Survey on the Security of Blockchain Systems
Li, X., Jiang, P., Chen, T., Luo, X., & Wen, Q. (2020) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2017.08.020 · Cited by 1,772
Blockchain for internet of things: a survey
Dai, H.-N., Zheng, Z., & Zhang, Y. (2019) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2019.2920987 · Cited by 1,246
An overview on smart contracts: Challenges, advances and platforms
Zheng, Z., Xie, S., Dai, H.-N., Chen, W., Chen, X., Weng, J., & Imran, M. (2020) · Future Generation Computer Systems · doi:10.1016/j.future.2019.12.019 · Cited by 1,197
A Survey on Security and Privacy Issues of Bitcoin
Conti, M., Sandeep Kumar, E., Lal, C., & Ruj, S. (2018) · IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · doi:10.1109/comst.2018.2842460 · Cited by 1,116
“Indeed, numerous attacks have been described targeting different aspects of the system, including double spending [2], netsplit [3], transaction malleability [4], networking attacks [5], or attacks targeting mining [6] [7] [8] and mining pools [9].”
BackgroundInfluentialBlockchain applications for industry 4.0 and industrial IoT: a review
Alladi, T., Chamola, V., Parizi, R. M., & Choo, K.-K. R. (2019) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2019.2956748 · Cited by 382
Metadata
- Authors
- Apostolaki, M., Zohar, A., & Vanbever, L.
- Venue
- 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2017-05
- Pages
- 375-392
- ISSN
- 1081-6011 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2611050176
- Cited by
- 469
- References
- 28
- FWCI
- 36.85
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Hijacking Bitcoin: Routing Attacks on Cryptocurrencies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/sp.2017.29
- The paper
- Apostolaki, M., Zohar, A., & Vanbever, L. (2017). Hijacking Bitcoin: Routing Attacks on Cryptocurrencies. 2017 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP). https://doi.org/10.1109/sp.2017.29
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.