PROTOCOL FOR MANAGING SECURE TRANSACTIONS IN A BLOCKCHAIN NETWORK WITH RISK-BASED ADMISSION

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35546/kntu2078-4481.2026.2.24

Keywords:

transaction management, blockchain, secure transactions, risk-based admission, transaction management protocol

Abstract

The paper proposes a protocol for managing secure transactions in a blockchain network with risk-based admission, which provides adaptive pre-consensus processing without modifying the underlying consensus mechanism. The protocol relies on an off-chain risk assessment service that generates a feature profile for each transaction, calculates a risk score using a transformer-type neural network module for tabular features, and estimates the prediction uncertainty. The risk score and uncertainty are transformed by a zoning policy into White, Gray, and Black zones with the formation of a protocol directive that defines the processing mode, priority, admission rules, and audit. Three modes are introduced: STD as standard verification, ENH as enhanced verification with additional control procedures, QUAR as quarantine processing with access restrictions and logging. Experimental verification was performed on the labeled part of the graph transaction set, in which, after removing unlabeled examples, 46,564 transactions with a profile of 188 features and a partition into training, validation and test subsamples were used; class imbalance was taken into account by weight correction of the positive class. The test achieved ROC-AUC 0.9207 and AUPRC 0.7588, which confirms the suitability of the risk assessment for protocol control The configured zoning thresholds formed a flow distribution of 0.6845 in White, 0.2929 in Gray and 0.0226 in Black, ensuring high quarantine selectivity with Precision 0.9655 and escalation of risky transactions to increased control with Recall 0.8596 for Gray and Black. The microbenchmark in batch execution B=256 showed average latencies of 0.0778 ms for STD, 0.5215 ms for ENH and 0.5815 ms for QUAR, making continuous hard verification resource-intensive. With actual zone shares, the average normalized cost of pre-consensus processing is 2.816 per transaction, and the savings compared to the continuous ENH policy reach 57.98%, while maintaining control of the risk flow without interfering with the consensus

References

Yu Y. Empirical analysis of EIP-1559: Transaction fees, waiting times, and consensus security / Y. Yu, Y. Lu, K. Nayak, F. Zhang, L. Zhang, Y. Zhao // In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. November 2022. Pp. 2099–2113. https://doi.org/10.1145/3548606.3559341.

Leonardos S. Dynamics of Ethereum’s EIP-1559 Transaction Fee Mechanism / S. Leonardos, D. Reijsbergen, B. Monnot, G. Piliouras // Distributed Ledger Technologies: Research and Practice. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/377329.

Azouvi S. Base fee manipulation in Ethereum's EIP-1559 transaction fee mechanism / S. Azouvi, G. Goren, L. Heimbach, A. Hicks // arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.11478. 2023. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2023.6.

Chotkan R. STARVESPAM: Mitigating Spam with Local Reputation in Permissionless Blockchains / R. Chotkan, B. Nasrulin, J. Decouchant, J. Pouwelse // In 2025 7th Conference on Blockchain Research & Applications for Innovative Networks and Services (BRAINS). November 2025. Pp. 1–9. IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/BRAINS67003.2025.11302925.

Karim M. R. Scalable semi-supervised graph learning techniques for anti money laundering / M. R. Karim, F. Hermsen, S. A. Chala, P. De Perthuis, A. Mandal // IEEE Access. 2024. Vol. 12. Pp. 50012–50029. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3383784.

Poon C. H. LineMVGNN: Anti-money laundering with line-graph-assisted multi-view graph neural networks / C. H. Poon, J. Kwok, C. Chow, J. H. Choi // AI. 2025. Vol. 6, No. 4. P. 69. https://doi.org/10.3390/ai6040069.

Milanés-Hermosilla D. Monte Carlo dropout for uncertainty estimation and motor imagery classification / D. Milanés-Hermosilla, R. Trujillo Codorniú, R. López-Baracaldo, R. Sagaró-Zamora, D. Delisle-Rodriguez, J. J. Villarejo-Mayor, J. R. Nunez-Alvarez // Sensors. 2021. Vol. 21, No. 21. P. 7241. https://doi.org/10.3390/s21217241.

Молчанова М. О. Інформаційна хмарна технологія нейромережевого аналізу зруйнованих споруд за візуальними даними з БПЛА / М. О. Молчанова, О. В. Мазурець, О. О. Залуцька, В. Д. Кадинська, В. В. Масловська //Науковий журнал «Вісник Херсонського національного технічного університету». 2025. № 3 (94), Т. 2. С. 345–351. https://doi.org/10.35546/kntu2078-4481.2025.3.2.44.

Wang, X., Li, H., Yi, L., Ning, Z., Tao, X., Guo, S., & Zhang, Y. A survey on off-chain networks: Frameworks, technologies, solutions and challenges. ACM Computing Surveys, 2025. 57(12), 1-35.

Elliptic Data Set. 2026. Kaggle. https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/ellipticco/elliptic-data-set.

Sobko O. Method for analysis and formation of representative text datasets / O. Sobko, O. Mazurets, M. Molchanova, I. Krak, O. Barmak // CEUR Workshop Proceedings. 2025. Vol. 3899. Pp. 84–98.

McDermott M. A closer look at AUROC and AUPRC under class imbalance / M. McDermott, H. Zhang, L. Hansen, G. Angelotti, J. Gallifant // Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 2024. Vol. 37. Pp. 44102–44163. https://doi.org/10.52202/079017-1400.

Published

2026-05-07