Topic: Bitcoin Network is under sybil attack - page 2. (Read 4353 times)

That's not really an excuse. There also is not evidence of the scope of this effect. Let us know how it works out after a fork when hardly any Classic users run their own nodes and they depend on a few entities controlling all their nodes on a cloud service. :popcorn:

To be fair, pool admins will lose control of hash power quickly if they go against their miners' interests. Just look at Ghash.io.

Regarding "backroom deals" (), Eric at HaoBTC indicated that Jeff Garzik similarly met with Chinese miners to facilitate support of Classic. After meeting with him they decided against it.



Please tell us about your solution to mining centralization that has somehow been lost on the entire community.

Oh, and on the subject of mining centralization: https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_devlist/comments/3bsvm9/mining_centralization_pressure_from_nonuniform/

It is obvious your love to Bitcoin Classic

san fransisco - https://myip.ms/info/whois/104.20.54.190/k/55850274/website/antpool.com

anywhere in the world

No, I'm not. If you want to support the network, then do it right. There are plenty of places where it won't cost you a fortune. This is one of the services that is being used to spread the attack, however it seems to have more locations available now (IIRC). There was at least 1 tweet of Brian asking people to join in. Additionally it is worth keeping in mind that only 1 out of 4 of those nodes is a full node. The rest are pruned nodes.

---

---

Did you not see this?

Lauda are you wrong is not only armstrong classic supporter,Armstrong have money and can pay for differently datacenters,the peoples do everything they can to save money,and choose cheap datacenters if you don't like it please offer money to those peoples to change datacenters if you can't do that don't speak for many datacenters

Core nodes are not switching to Classic. This is false, unless you're saying that somebody is managing to fool the chart by replacing a node every time somebody changed. This would have to be timed properly, and would honestly not make sense. Classic supporters (e.g. Armstrong) are actively supporting the Sybil attack. If they really wanted to support the network, they'd at least distribute their nodes among many datacenters.

It doesn't fit (yet) and hopefully won't. Maybe I should have added the word Classic somewhere for clarification.

there are no limits no one can prevent someone to run node,peoples try to save money using cheap hosts,

Are there even data how many nodes are only home based? I assume home based are mostly running only part of the time during a day, which based on the Core periodic daily fluctuation seems few hundrend, maybe up to one thousand home nodes only.



Running full node on such obsolete and low spec computer ? Pi has indeed future only with BlockStream, but it is not good Bitcoin future if full nodes must be compatible with such low spec computers as Pi...

are you also forgetting the other few hundred core nodes(majority) using other VPS (OVH SAS) (Hetzner)
what about BTCC's 100 node campaign

what about the raspberry Pi node campaign more recently?

bitnodes incentive 2015

needs we say more about sybil attacks based on core design

If we assume 150 Core nodes and 650 Classic nodes, then it fits the much higher DDoS risk for Classic nodes, thus the need to run on good DDoS protected vps. Classic is new, so these had to come recently. Such Core nodes maybe just come recently as well to pretend as Core nodes not switching to Classic (which is happening).

Probably both such Core and Classic nodes are run to support network with fully validating nodes, not to attack it (unless you can prove such malicious intend).

PS: I assume the pic representing BlockStream, at least it fits so well

ok i can understand what you say. My question is where is the servers of Antpool and other chinese miners if it outside China.

what part?

ok heres an image to help


A= world wide bitcoin network
B= a mining pools network.
C= a pool, note a pool can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a stratum location or asic location
E=a stratum servers, note a stratum can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a pool location or asic location
F=a asic miner, note a asic can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a pool location or stratum location

ok.. now then the pool(a) handles the transaction validation and decides what transactions it needs to put into a block. it then makes a BLOCKHEADER and sends that over the internet to the stratum servers(d). these stratum servers then over the internet send this small blockheader along with the difficulty required to the asics(f)

please note that that the asics do not receive 1mb of data that is 2000 transactions(based on a full block) they receive a blockheader and a difficulty and they transmit back a possible solution.(said it twice incase you glossed over it)

to clarify:
asics, stratums and pools do not send out every hash attempt to the bitcoin network and pools do not send every transaction to the stratum/asics..

so no matter how many transactions a block may have. an asic does not care, because all they handle is a blockheader and subsequent hashs. not full blocks.
no matter if the asic is in china and the pool is in iceland. an asic does not care, because all they handle is blockheader and subsequent hashs. not full blocks.

so many pools have asic farms in china so they can be just an hour delivery away from the asic manufacturers, rather then days oversea's shipping.
but the POOL server can be anywhere in the world. because what a pool handles (true blocks headers and hashes) vs what the asic handles(headers and hashes) are 2 different things.

So you really think that somebody who allegedly created 800 full nodes is doing this to support the network? Where have they been this whole time? What a joke.

No one besides the people who are behind it.

Fud is the whining for 6 months about the "death" of bitcoin from a small group of ppl and not this thread. Centralization of bitcoin nodes and attack like this that happen before some hours is a very serious problem and no one can take it so easy.

So do you still consider it as a sybil attack by mix of Classic and Core nodes, or you just close the thread to dont continue to spread FUD when you acknowledge yourselves some people are preffering to use good vps server because of better bandwith (and DDoS protection) and not as a intention to attack Bitcoin network ?

I really like to know and someone from Classic team to inform us how much will cost us per month to use the after fork Coinbase bitcoin version with this big data centers from nodes to relay every day transactions?

Tell us more about those amazing clients, great deals and bosses, and the objectives you have.

you're my favourite shill