Bitmain's Released Antminer S9, World's First 16nm Miner Ready to Order - page 145.

HagssFIN

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1710

Electrical engineer. Mining since 2014.

Quote from: NotFuzzyWarm on April 26, 2017, 07:17:47 PM

Quote from: HagssFIN on April 26, 2017, 07:06:49 PM

Yeah it used to be a service, but why hasn't it been modified in recent firmwares?
This is a security breach in my opinion because it can be used in a wrong way.
I commonly worried about device internet security safety, mostly with "internet of things" devices but now with a good reason with bitcoin miners as well.
It is something that should be looked into 100% or we will be fucked up.
We should pay more attention in general at device security.

Well as I posted in the other thread, yes it should be removed as part of due-diligence. And as with most embedded networked devices seems the designers just-don't- give-a-shit.

http://www.electronicdesign.com/embedded-revolution/beware-brickerbot-iot-killer is one Robin Hood's shot at IoT 'security'

Yeah, we are definitely at the same page.
I'm just interested if Bitmain would have any comment to this or will they be quiet as usual.

NotFuzzyWarm

legendary

Activity: 3822

Merit: 2703

Evil beware: We have waffles!

Quote from: HagssFIN on April 26, 2017, 07:06:49 PM

Yeah it used to be a service, but why hasn't it been modified in recent firmwares?
This is a security breach in my opinion because it can be used in a wrong way.
I commonly worried about device internet security safety, mostly with "internet of things" devices but now with a good reason with bitcoin miners as well.
It is something that should be looked into 100% or we will be fucked up.
We should pay more attention in general at device security.

Well as I posted in the other thread, yes it should be removed as part of due-diligence. And as with most embedded networked devices seems the designers just-don't- give-a-shit.

http://www.electronicdesign.com/embedded-revolution/beware-brickerbot-iot-killer is one Robin Hood's shot at IoT 'security'

HagssFIN

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1710

Electrical engineer. Mining since 2014.

Yeah it used to be a service, but why hasn't it been modified in recent firmwares?
This is a security breach in my opinion because it can be used in a wrong way.
I commonly worried about device internet security safety, mostly with "internet of things" devices but now with a good reason with bitcoin miners as well.
It is something that should be looked into 100% or we will be fucked up.
We should pay more attention in general at device security.

ComputerGenie

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 552

Retired IRCX God

Quote from: RoadStress on April 26, 2017, 06:45:55 PM

So is it possible or not to remotely shut down a BITMAIN miner due to their sloppiness and un-professional attitude? I'm not sure that I understand what are you stating.

What I'm saying is that, much like all software that doesn't get a complete overhaul recode, old code still remains. For the delusional conspiracy-theorists that believe in this drivel of Bitmain shutting down rigs without your consent, and you're a responsible computer component owner, then you're not still using "root" as your password and no one else can access your equipment and you needn't worry anyway.

Do you buy your tinfoil hats or do you make them yourself? Huh

NotFuzzyWarm

legendary

Activity: 3822

Merit: 2703

Evil beware: We have waffles!

Quote from: HagssFIN on April 26, 2017, 06:39:08 PM

BITMAIN: What is your official answer on this "Antbleed" -case?

Please see my replies on this:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18762495
and
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.18762648
I will verify with my s7's tomorrow.

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

Quote from: ComputerGenie on April 26, 2017, 05:19:09 PM

It's not an "issue". At the time that it was initially done, it was to be a service available to let you remotely monitor and control all of your rigs from 1 central location (and was part of the selling point of S7s for some people). Multiple desktop apps were created that allowed you to do the same thing, so Bitmain abandoned the idea but never removed the code. Years later, new ill-informed donkeys arrive on the crypto scene, discover the remnant code, and claim there's something nefarious about it. Undecided

FFS, the S7s still even have a tab for it (even though it was never publicly activated). Roll Eyes

So is it possible or not to remotely shut down a BITMAIN miner due to their sloppiness and un-professional attitude? I'm not sure that I understand what are you stating.

HagssFIN

legendary

Activity: 2464

Merit: 1710

Electrical engineer. Mining since 2014.

BITMAIN: What is your official answer on this "Antbleed" -case?

ComputerGenie

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 552

Retired IRCX God

Quote from: RoadStress on April 26, 2017, 04:26:10 PM

Quote from: ComputerGenie on April 26, 2017, 04:25:13 PM

Quote from: RoadStress on April 26, 2017, 04:22:07 PM

No word about www.antbleed.com here yet? Huh

Because adults know that minerlink stuff was added to firmware way back in 2015 and that there's not much removed from the S9 fw, just added to it.

So everyone bought the miners knowing this issue?

It's not an "issue". At the time that it was initially done, it was to be a service available to let you remotely monitor and control all of your rigs from 1 central location (and was part of the selling point of S7s for some people). Multiple desktop apps were created that allowed you to do the same thing, so Bitmain abandoned the idea but never removed the code. Years later, new ill-informed donkeys arrive on the crypto scene, discover the remnant code, and claim there's something nefarious about it. Undecided

FFS, the S7s still even have a tab for it (even though it was never publicly activated). Roll Eyes

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

Quote from: ComputerGenie on April 26, 2017, 04:25:13 PM

Quote from: RoadStress on April 26, 2017, 04:22:07 PM

No word about www.antbleed.com here yet? Huh

Because adults know that minerlink stuff was added to firmware way back in 2015 and that there's not much removed from the S9 fw, just added to it.

So everyone bought the miners knowing this issue?

ComputerGenie

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 552

Retired IRCX God

Quote from: RoadStress on April 26, 2017, 04:22:07 PM

No word about www.antbleed.com here yet? Huh

Because adults know that minerlink stuff was added to firmware way back in 2015, abandoned, and that there's not much removed from the successive S7/S9 fw, just added to it.

RoadStress

legendary

Activity: 1904

Merit: 1007

No word about www.antbleed.com here yet? Huh

NotFuzzyWarm

legendary

Activity: 3822

Merit: 2703

Evil beware: We have waffles!

Quote from: oawan on April 26, 2017, 10:33:33 AM

I haven't been able to find an answer to this, but after reading about ASIC boost, it appears that when mining on Antpool, a S9 should use ~20% less power? Has this been verified by anyone? Or is this only for miners hashing for Bitmain themselves.

Sigh...
With all that has been said here how did you ever come up with that conclusion Huh

A) Bitmain has time and again stated that EVEN FOR THEIR OWN USE IN CHINA it has NOT been used on the main BTC net. They have only experimented with AB on testnet. Many very knowledgeable folks here have given their confirmation that as far as can be seen it is not being used in any pool on the main network.

B) Because of 'A' NONE of their miners get a "boost" if ran on AntPool.

ComputerGenie

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 552

Retired IRCX God

Quote from: oawan on April 26, 2017, 10:33:33 AM

I haven't been able to find an answer to this, but after reading about ASIC boost, it appears that when mining on Antpool, a S9 should use ~20% less power? Has this been verified by anyone? Or is this only for miners hashing for Bitmain themselves.

It seems you have a misunderstanding of what you read, or you read too much speculation.
The process of finding a single share is reduce, and thus the speed of finding that share. While it does, in theory, "use ~20% less power", that is per share. An ASIC produces a share and goes on to the next one. It's not an overall reduction in consumption of power, just a reduction in the power required to produce a single share (thus yielding more overall shares per amount of energy consumed).

As fanatic26 said, no one has implemented it, yet, on the main network; however, if they did and you joined their pool, you would still consume the same power per 24 hour period that you currently do (it would just be a more efficient usage of your power).

Quote from: fanatic26 on April 26, 2017, 10:44:03 AM

It is astounding the lack of understanding people have over this whole asicboost thing...

Much like everything else in the crypto space. Undecided

fanatic26

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 560

Quote from: oawan on April 26, 2017, 10:33:33 AM

I haven't been able to find an answer to this, but after reading about ASIC boost, it appears that when mining on Antpool, a S9 should use ~20% less power? Has this been verified by anyone? Or is this only for miners hashing for Bitmain themselves.

It is astounding the lack of understanding people have over this whole asicboost thing. Its not this magic power reducing unicorn. Functionally it does NOTHING because the pools dont have it activated.

oawan

member

Activity: 67

Merit: 10

I haven't been able to find an answer to this, but after reading about ASIC boost, it appears that when mining on Antpool, a S9 should use ~20% less power? Has this been verified by anyone? Or is this only for miners hashing for Bitmain themselves.

VentMine

full member

Activity: 236

Merit: 105

Speaking of the S9 (or any miner for that matter) experiencing varied operating conditions over time, I notice my S9 will typically hash well at 14 TH/s with variance between 13-15 TH/s at my share difficulty (got the November batch), but after several days of operating it will drop down to average 12.5 TH/s. Pretty much every time I reboot it (hard power cycle) it will restart at that 14 TH/s average for a few days before dropping back down.

Any thoughts on this?

NotFuzzyWarm

legendary

Activity: 3822

Merit: 2703

Evil beware: We have waffles!

Quote from: chuckyphresh on April 25, 2017, 05:22:41 PM

I've looked through the forums for a bit but cant find any info on recommended runtime for the S9. Any thoughts on good on/off cycle times?
Thanks

Um, there is a good reason for no mention of cycle time: They are designed to run 24x7x365. This applies to any cryptocoin miner be it for BTC or an alt. After all -- if it isn't running, it isn't making money Wink

To be honest, as someone who designs/implements industrial power electronics as part of my work I must strongly state that frequent scheduled on-off with full cool down before restarting is damaging to ANY power electronics that generate significant heat.

Reason: mechanical stresses put on the myriad of solder joints and other connections caused by the materials heating up and expanding at different rates until temp is stable, then cooling down and shrinking again at different rates until stable. With a temp range of ambient (cold) up to around 100C when running we are talking a significant amount of stresses that will be needlessly created over and over again..

Now simple rebooting - that's another story. In short, if the miner is behaving normally - leave it alone.
That said, in the past I've often seen all bitmain miners from s1 on up sometimes get flaky after about 30 days or so. Still work, just might report wrong. Simple reboot and all is well again. I've also had miners go for months before being rebooted so your mileage may vary...

chuckyphresh

newbie

Activity: 25

Merit: 0

I've looked through the forums for a bit but cant find any info on recommended runtime for the S9. Any thoughts on good on/off cycle times?
Thanks

ComputerGenie

hero member

Activity: 1092

Merit: 552

Retired IRCX God

Quote from: VentMine on April 25, 2017, 11:25:43 AM

I'm looking at ordering some S9's here soon. It seems like there hasn't been many defective equipment lately, or at least not much complaining going on. Anyone having and issues lately with new-ish batches?

Last batch of "13.5" that we have are all running at ~13.6TH/s with ~0.0001% HW error rate (and all running as the manufacturer intended them to). Now mind you, that is in a controlled environment, not a garage or bedroom. Tongue

VentMine

full member

Activity: 236

Merit: 105

I'm looking at ordering some S9's here soon. It seems like there hasn't been many defective equipment lately, or at least not much complaining going on. Anyone having and issues lately with new-ish batches?

Topic: Bitmain's Released Antminer S9, World's First 16nm Miner Ready to Order - page 145. (Read 531168 times)