How Does a Consensus Mechanism like PoA Aim to Prevent Malicious Forks?

PoA prevents malicious forks by making them economically unfeasible and requiring coordination between two distinct groups. An attacker needs to control both the majority of hashing power (PoW) and the majority of staked capital (PoS) to sustain a malicious chain.

The stakers, motivated by their capital investment and potential slashing, are incentivized to sign only the legitimate chain, thus quickly invalidating any malicious fork attempt.

What Is the ‘Nothing-at-Stake’ Problem That PoA Aims to Address?
What Is the ‘51% Attack’ Risk in Both PoW and PoS Systems?
How Does the Capital Cost of a PoS Attack Compare to the Operational Cost of a PoW Attack?
Does PoA Fully Eliminate the Risk of a Sybil Attack?
What Is a ’51 Percent Attack’ and How Do Consensus Models like PoA Try to Prevent It?
Compare and Contrast the Security Implications of Proof-of-Work (PoW) versus Proof-of-Stake (PoS)
How Does a Hybrid PoW/PoS System Compare to a Multi-Algorithm PoW System in Terms of Security?
What Role Does the “Hashing Power” Play in the Security of the PoW Component of PoA?

Glossar