From: Kendra Smith
Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 1:44 AM
To: M?crosöft Research Tech Talk, Sem. Notice
Cc: Kendra Smith
Subject: UW-CSE Colloq / 4-6-2000 / Castro / MIT / Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance
UW-CSE Colloq / 4-6-2000 / Castro / MIT / Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance
*NOTE* This lecture will be broadcast live via the Internet. See
http://www.cs.washington.edu/news/colloq.info.html for more information.
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON
Seattle, Washington 98195
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Box 352350
(206) 543-1695
COLLOQUIUM
SPEAKER: Miguel Castro, MIT
TITLE: Practical Byzantine Fault Tolerance
DATE: Thursday, April 6, 2000
TIME: 3:30 pm
PLACE: 134 Sieg Hall
HOST: Hank Levy
ABSTRACT:
The growing reliance of our society on computers demands that we provide
systems with improved reliability, availability, and security. This talk
describes BFT -- a new software Byzantine fault tolerance toolkit that
addresses these issues.
BFT can be used to build replicated systems that work correctly and remain
available even when some of their replicas behave arbitrarily due to
malicious attacks, software errors, or hardware failures. Whereas previous
Byzantine-fault-tolerant replication techniques relied on unrealistic
assumptions or were too slow to be used in practice, BFT can be used to
build practical systems: it works in asynchronous environments like the
Internet; it uses bounded storage; and it incorporates several important
optimizations that improve the response time over previous techniques by
more than an order of magnitude. BFT is also the first to recover
Byzantine-faulty replicas proactively. As a result, it can tolerate any
number of faults over the lifetime of the system provided less than 1/3 of
the replicas become faulty within a small window of vulnerability.
This talk describes the algorithms used by BFT and the implementation of
BFT and BFS -- a Byzantine-fault-tolerant NFS service built using BFT. The
talk also presents results from a performance evaluation of BFT and
BFS. Preliminary results show that BFS is only 3% slower than a standard
unreplicated NFS when running the Andrew benchmark.
Refreshments to follow.
Email: talk-info@cs.washington.edu
Info: http://www.cs.washington.edu