Abstract We present a parallel abstract interpretation technique for polynomial programs with assertions presented as unions of range bound constraints. We use the powerset domain of hyper-rectangles to over-approximate sets of reachable states. Our key technical contributions include novel abstract transformers and refinement operators that account for the semantics of polynomial assignments and guards more precisely than earlier work, while remaining amenable to parallelization and efficient implementation. This is achieved by appealing to Farkas’ Lemma and Handelman’s Theorem, and by exploiting geometric properties of unions of hyper-rectangles. Our abstract interpretation technique proves safety properties of many polynomial programs that state-of-the-art abstract interpretation tools fail to prove. We have implemented our approach in a tool called PolyAbs , and experimentally evaluated it on a suite of benchmarks. Our experiments demonstrate the improved precision and broader coverage of PolyAbs vis-a-vis state-of-the-art abstract interpretation tools, including a commercial-grade tool.

Weighted model integration (WMI) is a relatively recent formalism that has received significant interest as a technique for solving probabilistic inference tasks with complicated weight functions. Existing methods and tools are mostly focused on linear and polynomial functions and provide limited support for WMI of rational or radical functions, which naturally arise in several applications. In this work, we present a novel method for approximate WMI, which provides more effective support for the wide class of semi-algebraic functions that includes rational and radical functions, with literals defined over non-linear real arithmetic. Our algorithm leverages Farkas’ lemma and Handelman's theorem from real algebraic geometry to reduce WMI to solving a number of linear programming (LP) instances. The algorithm provides formal guarantees on the error bound of the obtained approximation and can reduce it to any user-defined value epsilon. Furthermore, our approach is perfectly parallelizable. Finally, we present extensive experimental results, demonstrating the superior performance of our method on a range of WMI tasks for rational and radical functions when compared to state-of-the-art tools for WMI, in terms of both applicability and tightness.

To prevent DoS attacks, Ethereum assigns a fixed gas cost to every atomic operation in the EVM and the party who creates a transaction has to pay for its overall gas usage. While the gas model is successful in preventing DoS attacks, it causes significant costs in transaction fees. For example, in June-September 2022, the average daily gas usage of Ethereum was almost four million dollars. We propose a solution to minimize these fees by moving most of the execution of a contract off-chain and storing only the bare minimum on-chain. We then trigger an on-chain execution only if there is a disagreement between the parties to the contract, which is in turn only possible if at least one party is acting dishonestly. In such cases, our approach can identify and penalize the dishonest party by making them pay not only for the gas usage of their own function calls, but also calls made by other parties. Thus, it is game-theoretically irrational to behave dishonestly in this protocol. If all parties are rational, the total gas usage goes down significantly. Notably, our approach does not require a sidechain and works directly on the main Ethereum blockchain. We also provide extensive experiments over real-world Ethereum smart contracts, demonstrating that our protocol reduces their gas usage by 40.09%.

Modern programmable blockchains have built-in support for smart contracts, i.e. ‍programs that are stored on the blockchain and whose state is subject to consensus. After a smart contract is deployed on the blockchain, anyone on the network can interact with it and call its functions by creating transactions. The blockchain protocol is then used to reach a consensus about the order of the transactions and, as a direct corollary, the state of every smart contract. Reaching such consensus necessarily requires every node on the network to execute all function calls. Thus, an attacker can perform DoS by creating expensive transactions and function calls that use considerable or even possibly infinite time and space. To avoid this, following Ethereum, virtually all programmable blockchains have introduced the concept of “gas”. A fixed hard-coded gas cost is assigned to every atomic operation and the user who calls a function has to pay for its total gas usage. This technique ensures that the protocol is not vulnerable to DoS attacks, but it has also had significant unintended consequences. Out-of-gas errors, i.e. ‍when a user misunderestimates the gas usage of their function call and does not allocate enough gas, are a major source of security vulnerabilities in Ethereum. We focus on the well-studied problem of automatically finding upper-bounds on the gas usage of a smart contract. This is a classical problem in the blockchain community and has also been extensively studied by researchers in programming languages and verification. In this work, we provide a novel approach using theorems from polyhedral geometry and real algebraic geometry, namely Farkas’ Lemma, Handelman’s Theorem, and Putinar’s Positivstellensatz, to automatically synthesize linear and polynomial parametric bounds for the gas usage of smart contracts. Our approach is the first to provide completeness guarantees for the synthesis of such parametric upper-bounds. Moreover, our theoretical results are independent of the underlying consensus protocol and can be applied to smart contracts written in any language and run on any blockchain. As a proof of concept, we also provide a tool, called “Asparagus” that implements our algorithms for Ethereum contracts written in Solidity. Finally, we provide extensive experimental results over 24,188 real-world smart contracts that are currently deployed on the Ethereum blockchain. We compare Asparagus against GASTAP, which is the only previous tool that could provide parametric bounds, and show that our method significantly outperforms it, both in terms of applicability and the tightness of the resulting bounds. More specifically, our approach can handle 80.56% of the functions (126,269 out of 156,735) in comparison with GASTAP’s 58.62%. Additionally, even on the benchmarks where both approaches successfully synthesize a bound, our bound is tighter in 97.85% of the cases.