Topic: [DEAD] DeepBit.net PPS+Prop,instant payouts, we pay for INVALID BLOCKS too - page 255. (Read 1601357 times)

What's to stop someone from starting their own pool then writing a trojan or using a botnet to mine for their pool for the soul purpose of attacking the bitcoin system. I work in the IT dept of a very large (lets call it a corporation) we have over 10,000 HP EliteBook 8540w laptops at our discretion. I'm mining from mine and getting 65Mhash/s without any visible difference to the video performance. Let's say I create a service to mine bitcoins and push the service out to all 10,000 laptops that would give me 650Ghash/s by myself assuming a perfect setup where all laptops are deployed, in use, and online. I would now control ~25% of the total hashing power. This is just small scale example; if you applied the same theory to a worldwide computing trojan which could get up to 1.4Thash/s... bye bye bitcoin

Which is EXACTLY why I asked Tycho to voluntarily take measures to keep his pool from ever going above 50%.  When I asked this, simply closing registration probably would have been adequate, but that is no longer the case.

I'm failing to see you're point on multiple pools. Even if there was 4 equal size pools it would take almost nothing to ddos 3 of the pools off the network causing everyone to surge to 1 pool. I'm sure these pool owners aren't operating a google size network where DDOS attack won't phase them. Even VISA and multiple other enterprise corporations fell victim to DDOS attacks all at the same time during the wikileaks fiasco.

I still say if the system has this big of a flaw it never should have been adopted in the first place. The bitcoin system reminds me of the Death Star from Star Wars... Just gotta fire a single shot into the exhaust and it blows up.

They can work together and then yes, it is an issue.  It is more difficult for an cracker and hacker to take over two pools.  I would like to see three or for roughly equal size pools personally and all secured and ideally not running the same stock code (or craving and hacking multiple pools would be much easier).

Just license the software a reputable member who is willing to run another pool.

And it sounds like you're a selfish child who doesn't know how bitcoins work. a single entity needs to be in control of >= 51% of the mining for the double spending attack to even be feasible. 2 entities at 30% won't do shit.

Hi, 

  I just have a quick question, i'm currently mining at average 860+Mhash/s, do you think which method should i use? PPS or Proportional? I know the basic infos but i would love to know more base on your experience.

Hi!
I had automatic minimum payment to 10. I didnt know exactly what it did.
Today i passed 10 bitcoins and they disappeared, guessing they were automatically transfered to my deepbit adress, so i went to bitcoin program to see if there was anything and nothing. Doesnt show any 10 bitcoin transfer. Where did they go?

EDIT: Nevermind, already showing!

They will be added to his bitcoin address. He will see them when his bitcoin client downloads the block with this transaction.

You can send bitcoins to offline users.

Has live suppot been taken down?

I have a question; If I send Bitcoins to a buddy who is offline, will these get rejected, or just float around in the network until he is online?

It sounds like you want to obliterate pool mining all together. Everyone go back to solo mining, problem solved, :p

Even if you keep all the pools under 50% two pools combined would be well over 50% which can do far more damage and faster than 1 pool over 50%.

It isn't brought down by a pool going over fifty percent.  It is brought down by an attacker who beds control of AT LEAST FIFTY PLUS PERCENT.  The problem is that the amount of potential money at risk drives up massively with high prices and high hash rates.  Since we know from very recent history that if another large pool goes down, much of the hoard jumps to deepbit.  So an attack against Slush will send deepbit way over 50% which makes a much better tool for attack.  The larger the percentage of hashing power the greater damage that can be done before detection.

If this is allowed to happen, there are only two real winners; the attackers and AMD for selling so many cards for bitcoin mining.  A large attack would destroy bitcoin in its current state in my opinion.  If ignoring the possibility makes you feel better, then so be it ostrich.

I have seen absolutely nothing that has shown this attack as impossible or indeed improbable, but instead we put all of our faith in Tycho and a few others.

Thanks, thats exacly what I was looking for, but apparently missed it.

It sounds like you're referring to the Failure Detection Threshold. If you setup a separate worker for each rig and set the Failure Detection Threshold as low as 1 minute you will know if a rig is down because the worker will turn red if it hasn't submitted a share in the last minute. This doesn't necessarily mean it's down though... I have mine set to 10 minutes and sometimes it will turn red as if its down, but it's not, just took longer to submit a share.

Tycho, could u add some kind if information to account page, which would show time of last submitted share? My rig are on other floor and since Im changing sometimes clocks I'd like to know if rig is down faster than 30 minutes(the noise is terrible there, so I cant stand being ther more than 2 minutes...).

All aboard the 1Thash/s train! toot toot!

I say if a system can be brought down by something as simple as going over 50% then it was a poorly designed system and never should have been invented in the first place. Might as well test the theories on the 50% rumors now rather than later.

I never called it an attack.  I am not sure if you were referring to me or not.  What I said is that we are setup for one with deepbit that large.  It has already been shown, that in the short term, if somebody knocks out Slush [why was his pool down again? ... I didn't see a post on it, but I may not have been subscribed to his thread] most flee to deepbit.  Last time it resulted in, I think an additional 20% hashing power [and it has been largely recovered either by new mining power or attrition from other pools].  The amount of money to be made by such an attack is growing rapidly.  Further, the more hashing power at the attackers disposal means the more that can double spent because the more that can be "rechained" for lack of a better term before anybody catches on. 

I bet there are cracker/hacker groups out there that would do it for just a few thousand USD and that means with the means to do it, the ends are more likely.  The fact that this can be done now [since I have little doubt somebody could take down Slush with ease at this point], the less trust I have in the bitcoin I am sorry to say.  That is why I am asking people to do what Tycho won't, and goto or form other pools so that this can't happen.  I don't want deepbit disappear, I simply want it to be "community aware" if you will.

Sorry Tycho.  I feel bad that you have lost sight of what you once had sight of [or at least appeared to].

Same man and same code = same pool for all intents and purposes.  If a cracker can break one, then both can be cracked ... then hacked. 

Few hours ago it went back to normal/full speed, not sure what happened?

Tycho, in order to avoid all these hysterical voices 
please implement a second pool!