as) United States
`a2) Patent Application Publication co) Pub. No.: US 2018/0109541 Al
`Gleichauf
`(43) Pub. Date:
`Apr. 19, 2018
`
`
`US 20180109541A1
`
`(54) BLOCKCHAIN MINING USING TRUSTED
`NODES
`;
`;
`(71) Applicant: ARM Ltd., Cambridge (GB)
`.
`Inventor: Paul Harry Gleichauf, Los Altos, CA
`(US)
`
`(72)
`
`(21) Appl. No.: 15/295,695
`(22)
`Filed:
`Oct. 17. 2016
`‘
`,
`.
`:
`or
`Publication Classification
`
`(51)
`
`Int. CL
`FOAL 29/06
`HOAL 29/08
`HO04W 8/24
`
`(2006.01)
`(2006.01)
`(2006.01)
`
`(2006.01)
`(2006.01)
`
`HOAL 932
`HO4W 12/06
`(52) U.S. Cl.
`CPC we. HOAL 63/123 (2013.01); HO4L 67/1097
`(2013.01); HO4L 2463/102 (2013.01); HO4L
`9/3236 (2013.01); HO4W 12/06 (2013.01);
`HO4W 8/24 (2013.01)
`
`ABSTRACT
`(57)
`Briefly, example methods, apparatuses, and/or articles of
`manufacture are disclosed that may be implemented,
`in
`whole or in part, using one or more mobile communication
`.
`.
`:
`vs
`devices and/or processing devices to facilitate and/or sup-
`port one or more operations and/or techniques for block-
`chain mining using trusted nodes, such as via democratiza-
`tion of associated resources for fair blockchain mining, for
`example.
`
`
`
`Mobile Service Provider
`
`
`
`
`Transaction
`
`processor
`
`——————
`Subscribers DB
`_————
`Billing DB
`
`
`
`
`
`Blockchain
`scheduler
`
`Blockchain caches
`
`:
`Transaction
`
`processor
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inactive Mining Node
`
`Active Mining Node
`
`Inactive Mining Node
`
`Mobile Device
`IMEI Subscriber
`
`yY
`
`oooo
`
`IMSI
`ICCID,
`etc.
`
`106
`
`108
`
`Mobile Device
`IMEI Subscriber
`
`124
`
`IMSI
`ICCID,
`
`/,
`Y
`
`124
`
`etc.
`
`G0 imsi, ete.
`
`
`(___>IMSI, etc. (___? IMSI, etc.
`
`104
`
`Mobile Device
`IMEI Subscriber
`
`yY
`
`ooo9o
`
`IMS|
`ICCID,
`
`etc.
`
`1
`
`CRUSOE-1018
`
`CRUSOE-1018
`
`1
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication
`
`Apr. 19, 2018 Sheet 1 of 5
`
`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`uonoesuel| SpoNBHulull]
`
`Joss9o00id
`
`ga6builig
`
`Jajnpauos
`
`
`
`SpoNBulullysAnoeu|
`
`
`
`JOPIACdBIIAIOSaIIGoy\
`
` (SYgqsiequosqns_YY
`SAOV
`sayoeouleyoyoo|g
`
`
`219‘ISWI(_)
`
`JequosqnsIAIl
`(soe5)T=]
`
`B9!A9QSIIGOl
`OF
`
` ‘919“,|‘QIdOl/ISIPEL
`uleyoyso}g
`gqao1naq
`
`SPONBulul|]SAoeuU]
`
`
`‘218‘ISW!(__)
`UOIOeSUBL|
`
`Jaquosqns|SIl
`Joss3o0J/d
`
`S9IABqSIIGOIN
`‘919“,|‘QIool/|SWI_=
`aol
`
`
`
`B9IABQSIIQO
`
`
`
`JEqUosqns[SWI
`
`C=)
`
`801
`
`901
`
`oooo
`
`
`
`‘8‘ISWI[74
`
`Peat
`
`cc
`
`Lb‘S/d
`
`oooo
`
`vol
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication
`
`Apr. 19, 2018 Sheet 2 of 5
`
`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`200
`
`208
`
`Voice/data services
`advertisement, etc.
`
`Customer pool
`
`202
`
`204
`
`Enable customer
`
`voice/data
`
`206
`
`Yes
`
`Download App
`
`210
`
`212
`
`Validate
`+
`
`Provision
`
`214
`
`Available
`
`Voice/data mining services
`advertisement, etc.
`
`FIG. 2
`
`216
`
`Customer Pool
`+
`
`Mining pool
`
`3
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication
`
`Apr. 19, 2018 Sheet 3 of 5
`
`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`306
`Candidate Block N
`
`Transaction
`
`#N
`
`
`
`318
`
`Candidate Block M
`
`Rewards-rel.
`Transaction
`#0
`
`Rewards-rel.
`Transaction
`
`Reward
`
`Reward
`Transaction
`into next
`block
`
`322
`
`MSP
`Internal
`Blockchain
`
`#pt+1
`
`Block M
`
`
`
`transactions Transaction
`
`Transaction
`#n+1
`
`+
`#N+2
`
`Transaction
`#N+3
`
`START
`
`302
`
`304
`
`MSP
`broadcasts
`
`312
`
`Blockchain
`Customer
`#1
`
`
`
`308
`
`Broadcast to
`miner pool
`
`310
`
`Miner A solves
`Block N
`
`Broadcast to
`miner pool
`
`Return to
`mining pool
`
`Miners verify
`
`FIG. 3
`
`4
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Apr. 19,2018 Sheet 4 of 5
`
`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`400
`
`Communicating electronically with a plurality of nodes on a network
`regarding a validation of a block of on-line transactions for a blockchain,
`at least some of the plurality of nodes comprising at least one of the
`following: a full node; a lightweight node; or any combination thereof,
`one or more communications of the communicating electronically
`occurring, at least in part, through use of trusted computational
`capabilities of the at least some of the plurality of nodes
`
`Qualifying the at least some of the plurality of nodes for a reward based,
`at least in part, on the validation of the block of on-line transactions
`
`of the at least some ofthe plurality of nodes
`
`Qualifying the at least some of the plurality of nodes for a reward
`based, at least in part, on the trusted computational capabilities
`
`FIG. 4
`
`5
`
`

`

`Patent Application Publication Apr. 19,2018 Sheet 5 of 5
`
`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`500
`
`Jv
`
`508
`
`50
`
`Third Device
`
`6
`
`530
`
`Communication
`
`532
`
`502 Second Device
`
`052
`
`Processor
`
`524
`
`526
`
`Primary
`Memory
`
`Secondary
`Memory
`
`540
`
`Computer-Readable
`
`Medium
`
`FIG. 5
`
`6
`
`

`

`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`Apr. 19, 2018
`
`BLOCKCHAIN MINING USING TRUSTED
`NODES
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`1. Field
`
`[0001] The present disclosure relates generally to block-
`chain infrastructure and, more particularly,
`to blockchain
`mining using trusted nodes.
`
`2. Information
`
`[0002] Typically, although not necessarily, a blockchain is
`a content or data structure having a numberofserially
`ordered, back-linked blocks of validated on-line transac-
`tions. A block is typically, although not necessarily, a
`container-type contentor data structure that aggregates a list
`of on-line transactions and references—or“links” back—to
`a previous block in a chain, also called a “parent” block, via
`a digital fingerprint of the previous block or so-called block
`“hash.” As such, in a blockchain, each block contains a hash
`of its parent block, thus, effectively linking blocks in the
`chain via a sequence of hashes all the way to the very first
`block or so-called “genesis” block. Because a current
`block’s hash incorporates and,
`thus, affects a previous
`block’s hash in a blockchain, changing or modifying a
`parent block would modify a hash of its child’s block. In
`turn, changing or modifying a child block would modify a
`hash of a grandchild’s block and so on. Such a structure may,
`for example, ensure that, once a block has a larger or
`otherwise sufficient number of subsequent or next genera-
`tion blocks, the block maybe difficult to modify due, at least
`in part, to an expensive effort involving re-computations of
`all previous blocks. As such,
`if an existing block in a
`blockchain is changed,
`then subsequent blocks must be
`recomputed, at a considerable computational cost. There-
`fore, older blocks age to become accepted transaction his-
`tory, and more secure as a result.
`[0003]
`In someinstances, transactions within a block may,
`for example, be validated by a particular network node,
`known as a mining node or “miner,” such as by finding a
`correct solution to a mathematical problem or puzzle via
`repeated cryptographic hashing operations. Having solved a
`puzzle, a miner may, for example, receive a reward and/or
`appropriate fee and mayrecordits validated block of on-line
`transactions in a blockchain. At times, to be included in a
`blockchain, a validated block mayalso be verified or con-
`firmed, such as by other miners on a network to ensure that
`the block complies with consensus rules (e.g., includes a
`correct solution to a puzzle, has a syntactically valid struc-
`ture, etc.), network-wide or otherwise. To solve a puzzle,
`however, a miner may compete with other miners on a
`network, such as by generating fixed-length hashes by
`repeatedly trying to vary an output of a hash a very large
`numberof times, for example, until a resulting hash matches
`specific requirements. To achieve this, a miner may expend
`significant computing effort, processing and/or electrical
`power, amongother things.
`[0004]
`In this high-intensity computing environment with
`ever-more-difficult blockchain puzzles, a likelihood of a
`miner without highly specialized hashing hardware capable
`of more effectively and/or efficiently finding a solution to a
`blockchain puzzle is rather small. As such, blockchain’s
`incentive system encourages miners to adopt moreeflicient
`
`technology and, thereby, at least keep up with escalating
`difficulty of mining each new generation of blocks, and
`indirectly to jostle to monopolize potential earnings through
`utilizing continuously improved mining technology. Today,
`to make mining profitable or sustainable, miners may utilize
`application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs) with a sig-
`nificant hashing power, such as in relation to graphic pro-
`cessing units
`(GPUs),
`field programmable gate arrays
`(FGPA), etc. used in the past. As such, mining has become
`a business with significant capital costs (e.g., for an ASIC
`accelerated hash computation system, a place to house it,
`network connections, etc.) as well as operating costs (elec-
`tricity, monitoring personnel, etc.), meaning that ASIC min-
`ers geographically clustered near cheaper electrical power
`and/or cooler climates (e.g., for ASIC heat dissipation,etc.),
`for example, may gain an unfair advantage over other miners
`on a network. As a result, blockchain mining has become
`increasingly concentrated in particular geographic areas,
`such as in cooler (e.g., mountainous, etc.) places with readily
`accessible (e.g., unregulated, etc.) and/or cheaper hydro-
`power, for example.
`[0005]
`In someinstances, the ability to compete for lesser
`reward over time (possibly supplemented with transaction
`fees), such as due to a diminishing blockchain reward
`structure, for example, and/or exponential increase in min-
`ing difficulty may lead to a rapid escalation of more pow-
`erful hardware in fewer hands and/or particular geographic
`areas. This may, for example, disrupt a blockchain consen-
`sus mechanism, maylead to a decline in blockchain protocol
`security, may have international
`trust and/or resiliency
`implications, etc., and may ultimately lead to a failure of a
`blockchain mining market. For example, at times, a block-
`chain thought to be secure due,at least in part, to its length,
`as discussed above, may be undonebya group of conspiring
`miners having a significant share of a mining power via
`creating a longer chain (e.g., via a fork, etc.) and, thus,
`reversing previous blocks. As such,
`in some instances,
`security of a blockchain may require knowing that partici-
`pating miners have bounded and/or trusted computational
`capability, such as to guard against and/or detect potential
`selfish mining attacks, for example. Yet, current blockchain
`infrastructure may not be capable of determining or mea-
`suring trustworthiness of mining nodes, such as in terms of
`their computational capability, for example, especially in a
`blockchain network where nodes are generally unknown
`and/or allowed to join or leave the network with little or no
`restrictions.
`
`BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
`
`[0006] Claimed subject matter is particularly pointed out
`and distinctly claimed in the concluding portion of the
`specification. However, both as to organization and/or
`method of operation, together with objects, features, and/or
`advantages thereof, it may best be understood by reference
`to the following detailed description if read with the accom-
`panying drawings in which:
`[0007]
`FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating features
`associated with an implementation of an example use case or
`scenario of an operating environment.
`[0008]
`FIG. 2 is a flow diagram illustrating an implemen-
`tation of an example process that may be performed to
`facilitate and/or support techniques for blockchain mining
`using trusted nodes.
`
`7
`
`

`

`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`Apr. 19, 2018
`
`FIG.3 is a flow diagram illustrating another imple-
`[0009]
`mentation of an example process that may be performed to
`facilitate and/or support techniques for blockchain mining
`using trusted nodes.
`[0010]
`FIG. 4 is a flow diagram illustrating yet another
`implementation of an example process that may be per-
`formedto facilitate and/or support techniques for blockchain
`mining using trusted nodes.
`[0011]
`FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram illustrating an imple-
`mentation of an example computing environment associated
`with a server.
`
`[0012] Reference is made in the following detailed
`description to accompanying drawings, which form a part
`hereof, wherein like numerals may designate like parts
`throughout that are corresponding and/or analogous. It will
`be appreciated that the figures have not necessarily been
`drawn to scale, such as for simplicity and/or clarity of
`illustration. For example, dimensions of some aspects may
`be exaggerated relative to others. Further, it is to be under-
`stood that other embodiments maybe utilized. Furthermore,
`structural and/or other changes may be made without depart-
`ing from claimed subject matter. References throughout this
`specification to “claimed subject matter” refer to subject
`matter intended to be covered by one or more claims, or any
`portion thereof, and are not necessarily intended to refer to
`a complete claim set, to a particular combination of claim
`sets (e.g., method claims, apparatus claims, etc.), or to a
`particular claim. It should also be noted that directions
`and/or references, for example, such as up, down,
`top,
`bottom, and so on, may be used to facilitate discussion of
`drawings and are not
`intended to restrict application of
`claimed subject matter. Therefore, the following detailed
`description is not to be taken to limit claimed subject matter
`and/or equivalents.
`
`DETAILED DESCRIPTION
`
`this specification to one
`[0013] References throughout
`implementation, an implementation, one embodiment, an
`embodiment, and/or the like meansthat a particular feature,
`structure, characteristic, and/or the like described in relation
`to a particular
`implementation and/or embodiment
`is
`included in at least one implementation and/or embodiment
`of claimed subject matter. Thus, appearances of such
`phrases, for example,
`in various places throughout
`this
`specification are not necessarily intendedto refer to the same
`implementation and/or embodimentor to any oneparticular
`implementation and/or embodiment. Furthermore, it is to be
`understood that particular features, structures, characteris-
`tics, and/or the like described are capable of being combined
`in various ways in one or more implementations and/or
`embodiments and,
`therefore, are within intended claim
`scope. In general, of course, as has always been the case for
`the specification of a patent application, these and other
`issues have a potential to vary in a particular context of
`usage. In other words, throughout the disclosure, particular
`context of description and/or usage provides helpful guid-
`ance regarding reasonable inferences to be drawn; however,
`likewise, “in this context” in general without further quali-
`fication refers at least to the context of the present patent
`application.
`and/or
`apparatuses,
`example methods,
`[0014]
`Some
`articles of manufacture are disclosed herein that may be
`used, in whole orin part, to facilitate and/or support one or
`more operations and/or techniques for blockchain mining
`
`using trusted nodes, such as via democratization of associ-
`ated resources for fair blockchain mining. For example, as
`will be seen,
`in some instances, participants providing
`blockchain mining services may benefit from a variety of
`incentive plans that may be dynamically updatedto reflect a
`value of resources that participants may contribute. In this
`context, “fair,” “fairness,” or like terms with respect to
`blockchain mining refer to a principle allowing miners to
`track available rewards at a given time, such as while a
`blockchain mining process equitably and/or consistently
`honors these services and/or incentives. As also discussed
`
`these one or more operations
`in some instances,
`below,
`and/or techniques may, for example, be advantageously
`implemented, in whole or in part, in and/or with mobile
`communication devices. As used herein, “mobile device,”
`“mobile communication device,” “location-aware mobile
`device,”or like terms may be used interchangeably and refer
`to any kind of special purpose computing platform or
`apparatus that may from time to time have a position or
`location that changes. In some instances, a mobile commu-
`nication device may, for example, be capable of estimating
`its location using one or more appropriate techniques and/or
`communicating with other devices, mobile or otherwise,
`through wireless transmission or receipt of information
`according to one or more communication protocols. As a
`wayofillustration, special purpose mobile communication
`devices, which may herein be called simply mobile devices,
`may include, for example, cellular telephones, smart tele-
`phones, personal digital assistants (PDAs), laptop comput-
`ers, personal entertainment systems, tablet personal com-
`puters (PC), personal audio or video devices, personal
`navigation devices, navigation systems, etc., or any other
`type of device capable of being identified and/or authenti-
`cated via one or more communication protocols, wireless or
`otherwise.
`
`In this context, blockchain “mining” or simply
`[0015]
`“mining” refers to a process of validating a block of on-line
`transactions by a mining node or “miner,” such as for
`inclusion in a blockchain, for example, via solving a block-
`chain problem or puzzle, which may qualify the mining node
`or miner for a reward and/or appropriate fee. As used herein,
`the terms “mining node” and “miner” may be used inter-
`changeably and refer to a network node capable of solving
`a blockchain problem or puzzle via one or more crypto-
`graphic hashing operations, such as using a proof-of-work-
`type process or approach. Claimed subject matter is not
`limited to a particular process or approach, of course. For
`example, in someinstances, a proof-of-stake-type process or
`approach may be used, in whole or in part, such as employ-
`ing an escrow account for a particular miner and/or levying
`against disincentives to prevent or lessen improper miner
`behavior. Thus, even though a proof-of-work-type process
`or approach is used herein, such as for ease of discussion,
`any other suitable processes or approaches, consensus-based
`or otherwise, may be utilized herein, in whole or in part,
`such as instead of or in any combination with a proof-of-
`work-type process or approach. For purposes of explanation,
`to solve a blockchain puzzle, a miner of a particular block
`may hash the block’s header repeatedly,
`such as,
`for
`example, by changing one parameter at the end of the
`header’s hash, a so-called “nonce,” until a resulting hash
`meets a specific criteria, typically, a value that is equal or
`less than a currenttarget (e.g., a value of a hash of a block’s
`header, etc.). In some instances, one or more cryptographic
`
`8
`
`

`

`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`Apr. 19, 2018
`
`hashing operations may, for example, be implemented, at
`least
`in part, via a SHA256-type process (e.g., double-
`SHA256, etc.), such as for a target comprising a 256-bit
`number written as hexadecimal,
`though claimed subject
`matter is not so limited. Any other suitable cryptographic
`hashing operations now known (e.g., Scrypt, Blake-256,
`CryptoNight, HEFTY1, Quark, SHA-3, scrypt-jane, scrypt-
`n, etc.) and/or later developed may also be employed, in
`whole or in part, or otherwise considered.
`[0016] An “on-line transaction” or simply “transaction”
`refers to a signed on-line content structure indicating an
`agreement, communication, recordation, or some otherelec-
`tronic or on-line event. For example, a transaction may
`indicate a transfer of value, such as a cryptographic cur-
`rency, etc., transfer of assets and/or rights, such as a real
`estate property, confirmation of an identity, or the like. A
`transaction may, for example, be signed via any suitable
`digital signature, such as via a public key, private key, or the
`like, or any combination thereof. At times, a transaction may
`reference a previous transaction’s output as new transaction
`input, for example, and may assign one or more input values
`to new output, as was indicated. A transaction may or may
`not be encrypted. As used herein, “on-line” refers to a type
`of a communication that may be implementedelectronically,
`such as via one or more suitable communications networks
`(e.g., wireless, wired, etc.), for example. It should be under-
`stood, however, that these are merely examplesof a trans-
`action or on-line transaction, and claimed subject matter is
`not limited in this respect.
`[0017]
`“Content,” as the term used herein, should be
`interpreted broadly andrefers to signals, such signal packets,
`for example, and/or states, such as physical states on a
`memory device, for example, but otherwise is employed in
`a mannerirrespective of format, such as any expression,
`representation,
`realization,
`and/or
`communication,
`for
`example. Content may comprise, for example, any informa-
`tion, knowledge, and/or experience, such as, again, in the
`form of signals and/or states, physical or otherwise. In this
`context, “electronic”or “on-line content” refers to content in
`a form that although not necessarily capable of being
`perceived by a human,(e.g., via human senses, etc.) may
`nonetheless be transformed into a form capable of being so
`perceived, such as visually, haptically, and/or audibly, for
`example. Non-limiting examples may include text, audio,
`images, video, combinations, or the like. Thus, content may
`be stored and/or transmitted electronically, such as before or
`after being perceived by humansenses. In general, it may be
`understood that electronic and/or on-line content may be
`intendedto be referenced in a particular discussion, although
`in the particular context,
`the term “content” may be
`employed for ease of discussion. Specific examples of
`content may include, for example, an e-mail message, text
`message, audio file, video file, web page, or the like.
`Claimed subject matter is not intendedto be limited to these
`particular examples, of course.
`[0018] As was indicated, one or more network nodes may
`comprise, for example, one or more mining nodes capable of
`finding a valid proof of work for new blocks via repeated
`cryptographic hashing operations. Depending on an imple-
`mentation, a mining node may comprise, for example, a full
`node,a lightweight node, or any combination thereof. In this
`context, a “full node” refers to a network node capable of
`facilitating and/or supporting all or most processes for
`blockchain mining. For example, a full node may be capable
`
`of finding a valid proof of work, network routing, providing
`wallet services, maintaining a full copy of a blockchain in its
`memory, verify and/or propagate transactions, enforce con-
`sensus rules, or the like. A “lightweight node,” as the term
`used herein, refers to any mining node other than a full node.
`For example, a lightweight node may be capable offinding
`a valid proof of work for a block of on-line transactions
`and/or communicating block-related updates for inclusion in
`a blockchain, but may not be capable of maintaining a full
`copy of a blockchain in its memory, such as due, at least in
`part, to memory constraints, as one possible example. Thus,
`in someinstances, a lightweight node may, for example,rely
`on one or more other nodes(e.g., other lightweight nodes,
`full nodes, server devices on a network, etc.), such as for
`transaction verifications, block validations, etc. One particu-
`lar example of a lightweight node may include a simplified
`payment verification (SPV) node capable of downloading
`block headers, rather than full blocks, for example, for a
`blockchain. Claimed subject matter is not so limited, of
`course.
`
`Asalluded to previously, in some instances, block-
`[0019]
`security may be jeopardized or affected,
`for
`chain’s
`example, by a geographically localized syndicate of miners
`controlling a preponderance of mining computational
`resources, such as through access to cheaper power, superior
`mining technology, or the like. In some instances, these or
`like geographic concentrations, particularly over con-
`strained network links, may also impact or affect block-
`chain’s security due, at least in part,
`to network-related
`“bottlenecks.” As was also indicated, since a typical block-
`chain may allow for a participation of unknownand, thus,
`untrusted nodes, and since verification of nodes’ identity
`and/or computational capacity is outside of a typical block-
`chain’s protocol, at times, blockchain infrastructure may be
`vulnerable to selfish mining attacks, among others. Since, in
`some instances,
`a blockchain may be offered and/or
`employed as and/or in connection with a suitable service
`(e.g., for banking transaction processing, etc.), as discussed
`below, this may, for example, present a concern in some
`instances. For example, in banking, financial, or like sectors,
`among others, allowing unknownand/or untrusted parties to
`validate transactions, such as clear payments, remittances, or
`the like may not be desirable and/or prudent. In addition, at
`times, network-related scalability may affect performance of
`blockchain infrastructure, for example, considering that a
`relatively larger number of miners may be necessary or
`otherwise useful to validate transactions. For example, more
`“fragile” or less scalable networks mayfail to keep a larger
`number of mining nodes on-line (e.g., operational, etc.),
`which, in some instances, may makea task offinding a valid
`solution more difficult.
`
`To address these or like issues, at times, banking,
`[0020]
`financial, or like services employ private blockchains that
`maybeof relatively limited use, such as for inter-bank funds
`transfers, for example, by allowing another trusted bank(s)
`to participate, such as using trusted hardware to add blocks
`to a collective blockchain and keeping miners
`select,
`secured, and/or relatively small in number. This approach,
`however, may not fully benefit from decentralized and/or
`distributed nature of blockchain infrastructure, such as, for
`example, beyond the cloud-like model of being able to
`dynamically distribute load among manyparties and/or track
`the costs. As was indicated, at times, a larger numbers of
`participating authenticated platforms of known capacity
`
`9
`
`

`

`US 2018/0109541 Al
`
`Apr. 19, 2018
`
`increase a security of a blockchain.
`may, for example,
`Accordingly,
`it may be desirable to develop one or more
`methods, systems, and/or apparatuses that may generate
`and/or integrate trusted blockchain infrastructure with an
`operations support system (OSS)or like computing platform
`of a service provider, such as to implement blockchain
`mining in a larger-scale controlled computing environment,
`which may include a world-wide network of nodes, as one
`example, with provable computational capability.
`[0021] Thus, as will be described in greater detail below,
`in an implementation, one or more blocks of on-line trans-
`actions may, for example, be validated, at least in part, via
`finding valid proof of work while using idle cycles of
`processing units of network-connected mobile devices reg-
`istered with one or more mobile service providers (MSPs).
`Here, mobile device-related records may be used,at least in
`part, to address lack of trustworthiness or like issues dis-
`cussed above, such as via associated unique identities, for
`example, indicative of mobile devices’ computational capa-
`bilities. More specifically, based, at least in part, on one or
`moreidentifiers, such as an International Mobile Equipment
`Identity (MED), an International Mobile Subscriber Identity
`(IMSJ), or the like, an MSP maybe capable of certifying
`computational capabilities of its mobile devices and/or prov-
`ing that a particular mobile device is not an ASIC-acceler-
`ated miner with an unfair advantage.
`[0022] As also discussed below, charging cycles of par-
`ticipating mobile devices may be extended in some manner,
`such as at night while a network is underutilized,
`for
`example, and used, in whole or in part, for finding valid
`proof of work, communicating updates to a blockchain,
`and/or other applicable processes. Thus, in some instances,
`one or more operations and/or techniques for blockchain
`mining using trusted nodes may,
`for example, provide
`advantages, such as via enabling a service provider to offer
`one or more blockchain-related services, among others, in
`exchange for a reward and/or appropriate fee, as will also be
`seen. At times, utilization of trusted mining entities may also
`prevent rapid increases in mining capacity on a relatively
`fast cadence. Namely, with a possibility of an end-of-
`Moore’s-Law, a Nakamoto-based model for escalating dif-
`ficulty may, for example, become problematic since, at
`times, advancing cadenceofdifficulty may notreflect rates
`of advancing hardware capabilities. As was also alluded to
`previously, one or more approaches discussed herein may
`yield a more predictable and/or controlled blockchain infra-
`structure.
`
`FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram illustrating features
`[0023]
`associated with an implementation of an example use case or
`scenario of an operating environment 100 that may be used,
`in wholeor in part, to facilitate and/or support one or more
`operations and/or techniques for blockchain mining using
`trusted nodes. As was indicated, in some instances, example
`operating environment 100 may, for example, be imple-
`mented, in whole or in part, in connection with a blockchain
`service that may be offered and/or provided by a mobile
`service provider (MSP), referenced generally via an arrow at
`102. As seen, MSP 102 may, for example, have a plurality
`of subscribing mobile devices, referenced generally at 104,
`106, and 108, such as registered on its network via one or
`more unique identifiers, discussed below.It should be noted
`that, even though a certain number of particular devices,
`networks, systems, databases, features, links, etc. are illus-
`trated, any number of suitable devices, networks, systems,
`
`databases, features, links, etc. may be implemented herein.
`For example, in some instances, a numberofservice pro-
`viders may join efforts, collaborate, etc. so as to offer and/or
`provide mobile and/or blockchain services in a number of
`jurisdictions, even globally. For example, mobile service
`providers may confederate around the globe to provide a
`global service across a diurnal cycle with larger populations
`charging their phonesor otherwiserelatively inactive. Also,
`depending on an implementation, a single and/or double-
`sided arrow, if shown, may, for example, indicate a unidi-
`rectional flow, a bi-directional flow, or any combination
`thereof, such as with respect to signals, operations, pro-
`cesses, communications, and/or the like that may comprise
`and/or be represented via one or more digital signals. In
`some instances, example operating environment 100 may be
`implemented in an outdoor environment, indoor environ-
`ment, or any combination thereof. It should also be noted
`that example operating environment 100 should not be
`limitedto a particular service provider, such as MSP 102, for
`example. Any other suitable service provider, such as an
`insurance company, moneytransfer service, on-line market-
`place service, e-commerce service, financial service, com-
`munications service, or the like may be capable of imple-
`menting one or more operations and/or processes discussed
`herein, in whole or in part.
`[0024] Thus, according to an implementation, a user of a
`mobile device, such as mobile device 104, 106, 108, etc.
`may, for example, be given an option of joining a commu-
`nity of wireless subscribers, such as via an opt-in feature
`discussed below, so as to contribute an idle cycle from the
`associated mobile device for mining blocks of on-line trans-
`actions. At times, an idle cycle from mobile device 104, 106,
`108, etc. may, for example, be contributed as it completes its
`normal charging cycle, such as at night while a networkis
`usually underutilized, as one possible example. In exchange,
`an opt-in user may receive and/or share with MSP 102 a
`reward and/or appropriate fee earned as part of a blockchain
`mining process, such as if a mining node running on the
`user’s mobile device successfully mines a particular block,
`for example. A reward and/or fee may comprise any suitable
`reward and/or fee, such as, for example, a monetary reward,
`a non-monetary reward, a transaction fee, etc., or any
`combination thereof. For example, MSP 102 may determine
`as part of its customer service agreement whether a reward
`and/or fee may take a form of a direct payment, rebate on a
`subscriber’s billing and/or phone lease agreement, coupon,
`or any other suitable reward and/or fee (e.g., digital cur-
`rency,
`transaction validation fees, etc.). Claimed subject
`matter is not so limited, of course. For example, in some
`instances, a form, amount, etc. of a reward and/or fee may
`be determined, at least in part, by any other suitable party
`(e.g., a bank, etc.) or a combination thereof.
`[0025]
`Asillustrated, in an implementation, unlike typical
`blockchain infrastructure, MSP 102 may comprise,
`for
`example, an OSS, referenced at 110, which may include
`and/or be associated with one or more databases or like
`
`repositories comprising one or more records of mobile
`devices 104, 106, 108, etc. For example, one or more records
`may comprise standardized identifiers and/or keys, such as
`an International Mobile Subscriber Identity TMSJ), an Inte-
`grated Circuit Card Identity QCCID),