Distance-Preserving Digests: A Primitive for BFT Consensus
arXiv SecurityArchived May 18, 2026✓ Full text saved
arXiv:2605.15329v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Every BFT consensus protocol uses collision-resistant hashes to compare validator state. Collision resistance destroys distance: two validators agreeing on 19 of 20 transactions produce unrelated hashes, indistinguishable from validators sharing nothing. This forces three design constraints across the BFT literature: validators must synchronize state before voting, agreement quality cannot be measured until votes are counted, and hierarchical commi
Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary· Claude Sonnet
Computer Science > Cryptography and Security
[Submitted on 14 May 2026]
Distance-Preserving Digests: A Primitive for BFT Consensus
Ryan Patrick Mercier
Every BFT consensus protocol uses collision-resistant hashes to compare validator state. Collision resistance destroys distance: two validators agreeing on 19 of 20 transactions produce unrelated hashes, indistinguishable from validators sharing nothing. This forces three design constraints across the BFT literature: validators must synchronize state before voting, agreement quality cannot be measured until votes are counted, and hierarchical committees must be large enough for independent BFT, limiting tree depth. This paper introduces distance-preserving transaction digests, a primitive that replaces collision-resistant hashes with commutative vector sums in 8-dimensional space. The primitive has three properties hashes lack: distance is proportional to disagreement, weighted means are exact, and set differences are identifiable via bloom filter diff. We demonstrate three applications: a two-phase BFT protocol (Proxima) that achieves single-round finality when validators agree; tree-structured consensus with groups of 10 validators (vs 128 in Ethereum), enabled because distance filtering replaces per-group BFT; and cross-shard consistency verification at 128 bytes per shard pair, replacing the per-transaction coordination of two-phase commit. Safety is proved: fewer than N/3 Byzantine validators cannot cause conflicting finalization, independent of Phase 1 clustering or tree topology. At N =100,000, Proxima Tree uses 2.2x fewer messages than HotStuff (a structural property unaffected by parallelism). Single-core finality is 0.9s vs 18s for HotStuff; multi-core BLS narrows but does not eliminate this gap.
Subjects: Cryptography and Security (cs.CR)
Cite as: arXiv:2605.15329 [cs.CR]
(or arXiv:2605.15329v1 [cs.CR] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2605.15329
Focus to learn more
Submission history
From: Ryan Mercier [view email]
[v1] Thu, 14 May 2026 18:44:04 UTC (1,479 KB)
Access Paper:
HTML (experimental)
view license
Current browse context:
cs.CR
< prev | next >
new | recent | 2026-05
Change to browse by:
cs
References & Citations
NASA ADS
Google Scholar
Semantic Scholar
Export BibTeX Citation
Bookmark
Bibliographic Tools
Bibliographic and Citation Tools
Bibliographic Explorer Toggle
Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?)
Connected Papers Toggle
Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?)
Litmaps Toggle
Litmaps (What is Litmaps?)
scite.ai Toggle
scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?)
Code, Data, Media
Demos
Related Papers
About arXivLabs
Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)