Topic: 51% attacks, "secret asics", Exchanges losing money (Read 689 times)

Yeah so many people just want more even if they have a lot.  As Donald would say sad so sad.

If you didn't have funds on an exchange in others' hands;  you could not have lost them....   food for thought.
Not saying asics aren't the problem;  in fact I am pointing out that the people are the problem.


We are getting into debates similar to politics, and other societal nonsense.....
This is human nature.




Figure out how to change human nature.
Boom.  Problem solved.



Sorry for this cynical answer, but its the cold hard truth.

Every few years we get these so called attacks on some coins.

Last year a few of the Dagger hashimoto algo were targeted.
I think one was called Soil and can't get the name of the other one. All I remember is that it was run by some woman dev.

Both coins had a double spend attack on Bittrex deposits. I don't remember if they were successful in getting any coins but I remember it killed the coins value shortly after and then it became even easier to attack because it had an even small hashrate.

So yes, this is possible on many low to mid cap coins since they have less hashrate and easy to attack.

It's so obvious there's no need to wonder. They pay for an attack then offer their services to protect from future attacks.

Every coin needs its own proof of work or this situation will just get worse.

Not 100% accurate, but a good read. Thanks.


I think you reversed who the trolls were in the sia dev situation. They were trolling the community. All of their "ASICS WILL PROTECT THE COMMUNITY". Then "OMG! BITMAIN LET'S CHANGE POW!".

Does seem to be an additional plausible explanation as the same can then be spinned into that ASICs can offer protection from such.

 It's not paranoia if they really are out to get you.

 Good points all around.  I would look in Bitmains direction.  They announced a SIA ASIC after Obelisk did and made it available before Obelisk could ship theirs.  Makes you wonder if they had them all along and realized that when the Obelisk units hit their profitability would dive and they would be left with a lots of worthless hardware. 

 

hybrid POS/POW coins such as Trazercoin is the answer. You will need to buy enough coins and own enough hash power to pull off a 51%

Yep  I did quick study and I think   4 or 5 coins  could be attacked  with large nicehash rentals.

So to attack some coins like BTG or ETC, you do not need ASIC.

It's just like everybody was fighting using holy hand grenades and somebody came into the game with a nuclear bomb. Technology upgrades did happen quite a few times in history.

The difference is that in real life, who came up with new technology gradually own the entire system, so they then became the maintainer of the system, not breaking it. In Bitcoin/altcoins, PoW miners with new technology will not be able to out-rich Satoshi, so they keep breaking the network until they feel satisfied.

Let me fix that for you - ASICs/GPUs/FPGAs are a product of financial greed and it is as simple as that.




I don't think algo change helps at all, unless the original algo was in ASIC territory. If the original algo is GPU land (as in this example ETC), and changed algo was
 also in GPU land, it's just a matter of changing the mining software to that algo.

If the original algo was already in ASIC territory then algo change will secure you as the ASIC will not work on your network (of course, until a new ASIC comes around).

This thread is music to my ears.  Please do carry on.  You’re on the right track.  Let’s keep this alive and make this top of discussion

BR

Secret asics is nothing new although the practice is a lot more common than used to be, reason why the network should always be asic free. You know the hashrate of gpus cause everybody can have it and benchmark, you have no idea about asics, an asic can be 1000x more powerful than an old asic which --> 51% attack. A GPU will never be 1000x than an old gpu, maximum 200% but in most cases a newer gpu is not even 50% faster than the old one, meaning why sia devs got shot because they wanted money instead of security and sia devs sold to you all trolls the idea that asics was to secure the network hehe



That guy is right, with only 2.5% eth hashpower can get a 51% on etc which I always said not to mine cloned algorithm hashcoins like etc. The idea behind an algo is to be the only and unique so it means if ethash is only on eth then eth network can have the hashpower monitored, etc devs should have changed the algo when the chain was split.

Well  it is a good read  and  while I disagree with pos  as the solution  I do see that this is a real problem.

He talked about BCH  I think his  idea  could be done but that  bitmain would need to be in on a BCH attack since they  have enough hashpower to defend the coin.

It certainly could be done with ETC  vs ETH


Nice hash has
4400gh of hashpower for rent to mine ETC or ETH

https://www.nicehash.com/marketplace/daggerhashimoto

ETC has 6000gh to 11000gh
https://etcchain.com/chart/hashrate

The Realistic Lucrative Case of Ethereum Classic attack — Today

https://medium.com/@HusamABBOUD/the-realistic-lucrative-case-of-ethereum-classic-attack-with-1mm-today-8fa0430a7c25

You mean something like  double-spending attack that happened to bitcoin gold with those secret asics?Funny thing is that few days after bitmain came out with their blog how you will be abble to track where are your z9 asics and how they are needed to improve network security where they pointed on btc gold situation,irony is that they are probably behind the atack...

While I agree that we can't discount manipulation in our current market state, i disagree that ASICs are being developed to "defend" ourselves. ASICs are a product of financial greed and it is as simple as that.

With regards to 51% attacks, again it is nothing more complicated than a straightforward move to profit. In case you aren't aware, the 51% attacks modified the blockchain to make it seem that the attackers had millions worth of BTG when in reality they did not. The "scare" is just a side effect.

I agree with you. Recently, the game is not on the General rules. In theory, 51% of attacks kill decentralization as such. And this should not be welcome in mining and generally in crypto-currencies. Decentralization is one of the main advantages of cryptocurrencies. But someone wants to take everything into their own hands and manage the price. I still know that the creators of ASICs first engaged in mining on them, and then they are sold.

DISCLAIMER: I have no inside information, this is just speculation and my current "Tin Foil Hat Theory"

Some thoughts I've been having in recent days...

I recently read a blog from a SIA Dev on the state of cryptocurrency mining - https://blog.sia.tech/the-state-of-cryptocurrency-mining-538004a37f9b

In that blog the SIA Dev spoke about many things and one of them that stuck out to me was the "secret asics" piece. I had always considered this was likely and probably occurring but I'm starting to believe now that it's occurring more than we realize as a community.

Now within weeks we are seeing multiple 51% attacks on multiple chains / coins.

All this makes me wonder, are these 51% attacks and "secret asics" being used to justify the case for Asics? Furthermore, was that Dev right about certain companies "playing dirty" ? (note I'm not singling out any single company as he is in his blog)

Part of me wonders are these 51% attacks being done to create a community of fear that we "need asics" to defend ourselves against these attacks?

Part of me wonders if someone with a very large bankroll and the ability to create their own secret asic has realized they can take a relatively unknown coin that has a low market value and cap and exploit it by mining a ton of it and then sending that through exchanges as we have seen with recent attacks on XVG and BTG. Several large players come to mind on this conspiracy theory.

To me this all seems like a great coincidence or a serious situation where the entire industry is being manipulated and attacked (more so than usual).

I think these recent events may steer future algos/chains/coins towards Asics once they get up to speed. If these attacks on chains keep leaving exchanges at a loss from the manipulation, it may make it even more difficult for an exchange to list new coins... I could even see some exchanges refusing to list a coin without asics to "secure the chain" or requiring an insane amount of confirmations on transactions (100+) before they will process anything when an asic is not present.

One thing is clear in all this though, if these attacks keep up, we are going to see some huge changes on the way exchanges behave and that will only be the beginning.