Despite 5f+1 being 50% cheaper to attack than 3f+1 and 75% cheaper than 2f+1 : it's still unprofitable.
2f+1
3f+1
5f+1
SOL cost
≈ 0.00 M SOL
≈ 0.00 M SOL
≈ 0.00 M SOL
USD cost
$ 0 B
$ 0 B
$ 0 B
stakeglobal
+100%
+50%
+25%
assumptions
Attacker has no SOL, buys at market price, doesn't take SOL from stakeglobal, and can add stakebyzantine to stakeglobal without limitations.
In a real world scenario, an attacker could get better rates with OTC trades; steal SOL from, or collude with part of stakeglobal, and will encounter limitations when adding
stakebyzantine to stakeglobal in large amounts.
5f+1
5f+1 byzantine fault tolerance (min. 80% correct nodes) means the network can't preserve integrity if :
stakebyzantine>51(stakeglobal+stakebyzantine)
stakeb resolves to 41⋅stakeg because attacker adds stakeb to stakeg :
In a 5f+1 setup with stakeg ≈ 0.00M SOL, attacker has to add stakeb ≈ 0.00M SOL ($ 0 B) to the network to degrade its
integrity or liveliness, resulting in a +25% change to stakeglobal.
3f+1
3f+1 byzantine fault tolerance (min. 66% correct nodes) means the network can't preserve integrity if :
stakebyzantine>31(stakeglobal+stakebyzantine)
stakeb resolves to 21⋅stakeg because attacker adds stakeb to stakeg :
In a 3f+1 setup with stakeg ≈ 0.00M SOL, attacker has to add stakeb ≈ 0.00M SOL ($ 0 B) to the network to degrade its
integrity or liveliness, resulting in a +50% change to stakeglobal.
2f+1
2f+1 byzantine fault tolerance (min. 50% correct nodes) means the network can't preserve integrity if :
stakebyzantine>21(stakeglobal+stakebyzantine)
stakeb resolves to stakeg because attacker adds stakeb to stakeg :
In a 2f+1 setup with stakeg ≈ 0.00M SOL, attacker has to add stakeb ≈ 0.00M SOL ($ 0 B) to the network to degrade its
integrity or liveliness, resulting in a +100% change to stakeglobal.
cost difference
Comparing 3f+1 to 5f+1
Given 3f+1 attack threshold :
stakeb>31(stakeg+stakeb)⟹stakeb>21⋅stakeg
And 5f+1 attack threshold :
stakeb>51(stakeg+stakeb)⟹stakeb>41⋅stakeg
Δ=41stakeg between 3f+1 and 5f+1 :
Δ=21⋅stakeg−41⋅stakeg=41⋅stakeg
Translates into a 50% cost reduction :
Cost Reduction=21⋅stakegΔ=21=50%
Comparing 2f+1 to 5f+1
Given 2f+1 attack threshold:
stakeb>21(stakeg+stakeb)⇒stakeb>stakeg
And 5f+1 attack threshold:
stakeb>51(stakeg+stakeb)⇒stakeb>41⋅stakeg
Δ=43⋅stakeg between 2f+1 and 5f+1 :
Δ=stakeg−41⋅stakeg=43⋅stakeg
Translates into a 75% cost reduction :
Cost Reduction=stakegΔ=43=75%
analysis
Despite 5f+1 being 50% cheaper to attack than 3f+1 and 75% cheaper than 2f+1 : it's still unprofitable, and a very costly endeavor.
However, a sharp decrease of stakeglobal, SOL/USD, or increase of Solana TVL could make it profitable.