People should take note of this. Not because of the hack, but because of the immediate step-up of the developers to defend the integrity of the coin.
Ladies and gentlemen, I do believe the bar has effectively been raised.
+10
But thing about it widely:
1) Conclusion is that
VRC is valuable to 8m /27 *100% =
30% attacks...not 51%2) Big hit into decentralization image of VRC "rolbacks" - shows that crypto is not decentralized coin...
So fork BTC before MtGox that way...
51% of staking coins is all that is necessary to attack. Not 51% of all coins.
And here is, in my opinion, where the problem lays: A few days back we learned that there's a wallet, NOT an exchange wallet -which in itself is not safeguard either-, that has in excess of 4.5 million Vericoins. That is, obviously -or at least in my estimation-, more than 51% of all
staking VCR. Therefore, the attack happened. And was successful because if you have 51% the success is guaranteed. Mind you, the attack could have happened with much less VRC, even 35-38% and it would still have a great probability of success although not guaranteed.
Also, I don't believe a hard fork -that I consider the best current option, by the way-, presents a real solution for, indeed, the attacks can -and WILL- continue. The problem is, precisely, the one aforementioned: Someone (or a group, such as The Black Hand, who we know now operates fully in VRC), owning an amount of coins that adds up to 51% or more of all staking coins. This is serious stuff to think since we also know that The Black Hand has the money resources to have hoarded those 4.5 million coins and, in fact, take effective control of VRC away from the devs for they can do anything they want no matter what the devs choose to do.
I am not implying the Black Hand has perpetrated this attack -although that would be my guess-, I am stating the fact that apart from this attack, the situation is unsustainable with someone controlling 1/4+ of all coins. I don't know either how to prevent such situation for even if measures are taken to limit ownership, there's no way to prevent the same exact thing happening... only spreading the ownership through several wallets. It doesn't take a genius to figure out what is going on.
Or, for that matter, why someone is willing to "generously" write "five figures checks..."