Mar 20, 20257 min readConsensus & MiningIntermediate
PoW vs PoS: Censorship & Attack Surface
Comparing miners, stakers and validator committees on who can censor, how cartels form and how systems react under pressure.
Ergo
Proof-of-Work
Proof-of-Stake
DPoS
BFT
censorship resistance
attack surface
validators
mining
regulation
Click to Enlarge
About This Infographic
This graphic looks at censorship and attack surface across three consensus families: Proof-of-Work (Ergo / Bitcoin), classic Proof-of-Stake, and validator-committee designs (DPoS/BFT).
The top section asks a simple but uncomfortable question: who can actually block your transactions? PoW puts that power with miners and pools controlling hashpower, but those actors are permissionless and can change over time. Classic PoS shifts power to large validators and custodians controlling bonded stake. Validator committees go further, concentrating block production in a small, named set of companies.
The comparison rows then explore how easy it is to form a cartel, what happens under regulatory or legal pressure, and which resistance tools users really have in each model.
Key Points
PoW: Miners and mining pools control hashpower but are permissionless and can change over time.
Classic PoS: Large stakeholders and validator operators (exchanges, custodians) control most bonded stake.
Validator Committees: A small, named set of validators with explicit roles in block production.
Cartel formation: Hard in PoW (requires massive hashpower), medium-easy in PoS, trivial in committees.
Under regulatory pressure: PoW miners can relocate or hash can defect; PoS validators are identifiable and can be pressured.
User resistance tools: In PoW, redirect hashpower or spin up new miners; in PoS, slow and painful exits from captured providers.
How to Read This Infographic
01.
Compare the three columns: PoW (Ergo/Bitcoin), Classic PoS, and Validator Committees (DPoS/BFT).
02.
Row 1: Who can censor transactions?
03.
Row 2: How easy is it to form a cartel?
04.
Row 3: What happens under regulatory or legal pressure?
05.
Row 4: What resistance tools do users have?
06.
Note the progression from decentralized (PoW) to increasingly centralized (committees).
Related Topics
Proof-of-Work vs Proof-of-Stake
Censorship resistance in blockchain
Mining decentralization
Validator centralization risks
Ergo's Autolykos PoW
Usage Guidelines
- • You can use this infographic in presentations, blog posts, or educational materials
- • Please keep the attribution link to ergoblockchain.org
- • For custom branding or editable files, contact the Ergo community
Embed this infographic
Copy the code below to use this infographic in your blog or website.
Please keep the link to ergoblockchain.org.
<a href="https://ergoblockchain.org/infographics/pow-vs-pos-censorship-and-attack-surface?utm_source=embed&utm_medium=referral" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">
<img
src="https://ergoblockchain.org/infographics/pow-vs-pos-censorship-and-attack-surface.png"
alt="Infographic titled PoW vs PoS: Censorship & Attack Surface comparing Proof-of-Work, classic Proof-of-Stake, and validator-committee models on who can censor, cartel risk, regulatory pressure, and resistance tools."
style="max-width:100%; height:auto; border:0;"
loading="lazy"
/>
</a>
<p style="font-size:12px; color:#888;">
Source: <a href="https://ergoblockchain.org/infographics/pow-vs-pos-censorship-and-attack-surface?utm_source=embed&utm_medium=referral" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">ergoblockchain.org</a>
</p>Explore More Ergo Infographics
Discover visual guides to Ergo's PoW, eUTXO smart contracts, storage rent, privacy and more.
Browse All Infographics