4 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Marcin Pawlowski
2248a048d4
pd: cover the new cover-traffic config fields in the key() test
The key() coverage test enumerates every SimConfig field, so the five cover-
traffic knobs had to be given alternative values. Caught by the test itself
immediately after the previous commit.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:58 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
0f125b40c6
pd: correlated AS/region churn, and two report caveats corrected
Uncorrelated churn alone was incomplete: real outages take out a datacentre, AS
or region as a unit. Adds failure domains and a correlated churn mode, plus the
metric needed to tell the two apart.

- n_regions / region_locality: nodes belong to equal-sized failure domains, and
  a configurable share of each node peers inside its own domain. Locality is what
  makes a failure domain a connectivity domain -- with region-blind peering,
  dropping whole regions removes a uniformly random set of nodes and is
  indistinguishable from uniform churn. The locality matchings keep the graph
  exactly d-regular (they change where peers are, never how many).
- churn_mode = uniform | regional, swept per topology so both modes are compared
  on the same graph at an identical dead-node count.
- frac_reached_live: coverage of the *responsive* network, alongside coverage of
  all nodes. The two move in opposite directions under correlated failure, so one
  number could not express the result.

Measured (degree 4, 20 domains, 75% locality, half the network dead): clustered
failure leaves the survivors fully connected -- live coverage 1.000 and delivery
equal to the live-relay rate, i.e. nothing lost to routing -- where the same
number of scattered failures gives 0.857 live coverage and loses delivery to
broken routes. Correlated outages are gentler on the survivors than uniform
churn, while stranding the dead domains. Verify check 8 anchors this.

Also, per review of the caveats: exact d-regularity is a protocol requirement
rather than a modelling simplification, and the timing-correlation adversary is
deferred because it is only meaningful once the network emits cover traffic,
which this simulator does not yet do.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:56 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
9b03a68a84
Add linkability, messaging redundancy and churn percolation to pd; report
Extends the pd Blend simulator along two axes the deanonymization model
opened up, adds the reports/blend/pd report of record, and fixes three
correctness defects found while reviewing the result.

Linkability over time (pd.linkability):
- time to link an emitter ~ 30s*ln(1/(1-alpha))/(stake*q): inversely
  proportional to stake, so a 5% staker is linked in ~2 days and a 0.001%
  staker only after ~27 years;
- time to certify a node's stake >= theta from the count of attributable
  observations (relative precision ~1/sqrt(N)): sizing a node costs 100-400x
  more than identifying it, and sub-0.1% stake is practically unlearnable.
Both are closed forms over the exact deanonymization rates and a
stake-proportional 30 s emission cadence, checked against a Monte-Carlo of
the emission process in verify.

Messaging redundancy (R independent cascades per emission, R = 1..4):
- `redundancy` knob threaded through config/rng/propagation/engine/metrics/
  sweep; a node receives from whichever cascade reaches it first, so arrival
  times combine element-wise. Delivery and capture both follow 1-(1-x)^R, so
  redundancy trades reliability against anonymity and divides time-to-link
  by ~R. Measured: delivery 0.34 -> 0.81 at 30% churn for R = 1 -> 4, while a
  1%-staker's time to link falls 10 d -> 2.5 d.
- Redundancy buys NO coverage: a cascade only delivers if the sender could
  already route to its relay, so every delivered cascade floods the sender's
  own component. Coverage is flat in R to four decimals at every degree.
- Near the percolation threshold the cascades fail together rather than
  independently, so redundancy under-delivers against 1-(1-p1)^R there.

Churn percolation (configs/percolation.yaml, verify check 7):
- the flood only crosses responsive nodes, so it lives on the responsive
  sub-graph -- site percolation on a d-regular graph. A network survives churn
  only up to u_c = 1 - 1/(degree-1); measured collapse lands on the predicted
  threshold for every degree (3 -> 0.50, 6 -> 0.80, 16 -> 0.93), which inverts
  into the sizing rule degree > 1 + 1/(1-u).

Correctness fixes:
- redundancy delay used the fastest cascade's own full delay, which
  over-states it (min-max vs max-min); now the element-wise earliest arrival,
  reducing exactly to the single-cascade model at R = 1 (test);
- the "redundancy improves coverage" claim was false in both the report and
  the simulator README -- removed and replaced with the measured result;
- per-hop latency is degree-dependent (1.5 s at degree 16 to 2.7 s at degree
  3), not a flat 1.6 s; and the worst-case observation figure was averaged
  over degrees -- at degree 8 and f_adv = 0.2 it is 0.83 -> 1.000.

Statistics: round counts raised for resolution rather than speed -- 8000
rounds per cell in the main sweep, 9600 in the redundancy study, 6400 in the
percolation study, giving SEM <= 0.009 on every delivery rate and <= 0.04 s
on every delay mean. The previous redundancy grid (144 rounds/cell) produced a
non-monotonic delivery curve; it is now monotonic and within 0.015 of theory.
Adversary and deanonymization metrics remain closed-form and exact.

reports/blend/pd: the report of record -- peering-degree trade-offs across
speed, observation, eclipse, deanonymization and reliability, plus the
time-to-link, stake-inference, redundancy and churn-threshold sections, with
21 figures of record and an explicit sampling-error statement.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:55 +02:00
Marcin Pawlowski
6ad63ce2f3
Add pd: peering-degree Blend Monte-Carlo graph simulator
Static-graph simulator quantifying how a node's peering degree trades off
propagation speed, adversary exposure, deanonymization, and reliability in the
Blend network. Scales to 1e6 nodes (sparse CSR + sampled Dijkstra); the
adversary and deanonymization metrics are exact at every N.

Model (ms): seeded d-regular peer graph (matching-union), Blend cascade
(sender -> blend_hops timed-release mix relays -> final flood), geographic link
base + exponential transport jitter, per-node processing lag, free-running
release-clock mixing.

Metrics:
- propagation: full-delay mean/p50/p90/p99, path/broadcast split, coverage times
- reliability: message success-delivery-rate ~ (1-unresponsive_frac)^blend_hops
  and flood coverage, with unresponsive nodes modelled as routing holes
- adversary (exact): observed/eclipsed fractions, random + worst-case placement
- deanonymization (exact): P(whole blend path adversarial) ~ f_adv^blend_hops,
  and full deanonymization (path adversarial AND honest sender peered with an
  adversary) = deanon_rate * observed_frac

Deterministic blake2b seed streams, three parquet tables, joblib parallelism,
memguard, an analytic verify harness, 50 unit tests, and an auto-installing
Makefile.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-08-06 17:59:55 +02:00