I'll give you warning first, I'm more interested in the results than actual double spending.
Thanks, I've disabled trading in the meantime since I currently have poor network connectivity due to traveling which makes it difficult to fix issues. One thing to test would be to withdraw namecoins from the exchange and try to reverse it. 
Topic: delete - page 5. (Read 23382 times)
BitcoinEXpress, are you the guy who makes the BitcoinExpress iPhone app?
1) What effect would this have on exchanges especially Bitparking, DoubleC has been really cool and don't want to cause undue trouble for him.
I have shutdown the namecoin exchange while this attack is in process. I'll bring it up shortly with trading disabled to enable withdrawal of funds and reduce the danger of double spend issues. 
You could probably stop anyone else registering domains. In effect you would be the icann of .bit because no one could send registrations without your say.
The merged mining isn't supposed to happen for another 6000+ blocks which will easily be a year from now at the current rate.
It will happen 276 blocks later (@19200).
hmmm, don't know why I thought it was 25,000.
At first implementation of "merged mining" was planned at block 24,000 if I recall correctly.
Later it was changed to 19,200.
The merged mining isn't supposed to happen for another 6000+ blocks which will easily be a year from now at the current rate.
It will happen 276 blocks later (@19200).
If I were the Namecoin leadership I would immediately adopt an i0coin style re-targeting to get the difficulty down asap and bring in some miners to raise network speed. I defies all logic as to why they have let it stagnate in this position for several months. Don't they realize that in about 6 months when the difficulty drops, the huge miners will once again send the difficulty back to the 100K range in about 3-4 days?
Namecoin is more of a service than a cryptocurrency, and more about developing technology than making money. Since the development continues, it's not extremely important to get the difficulty down "ASAP". They developed the merged mining technology, which will almost certainly solve the problem without mangling with the retargeting scheme.
I haven't thought about what you can do with that kind of attack in Namecoin. You shouldn't be able to register two names with the same coins. You could probably skin an exchange though...
It doesn't really matter value-wise to let the difficulty stagnate, it's just like trickle blocks and then getting payday at the end of the month for a few days. In the end the same amount of coins should be averaged out, it does seem silly that there's no 'agreement' by the clients that "hey, difficulty won't be hit in two weeks at this rate, after two weeks retarget" I mean it's obviously easier to agree on a block number based on math of +2016 blocks or whatever, instead of an arbitrary time, but there's got to be some way to retarget sooner.
I'm no professional on the subject, but if you doublespend and not really use the spendings to cash out profit from it, it won't really be harming anything in the long run. Especially if you do it to two homemade wallets for yourself in a VM or another pc. You'd be able to test it and not harm anyone then.
In that case you could have tested with a much smaller amount of power on like bitcoin testnet anyway, so my guess is you're intending to profit off the attack which I can't condone or help you with.
Already registered .bit names shouldn't get hurt, you only pay the fee when you register a name, the rest is just swapping amount around, if you're not using register commands in the attack, you'll be only attacking the currency part of the coins themselves, it would only have an effect on exchanges if there was an absurd amount of coins hitting the market, obviously you'd be able to sell off at any price and still be profiting so you could crash all the bid orders.
I'm no professional on the subject, but if you doublespend and not really use the spendings to cash out profit from it, it won't really be harming anything in the long run. Especially if you do it to two homemade wallets for yourself in a VM or another pc. You'd be able to test it and not harm anyone then.
In that case you could have tested with a much smaller amount of power on like bitcoin testnet anyway, so my guess is you're intending to profit off the attack which I can't condone or help you with.
Already registered .bit names shouldn't get hurt, you only pay the fee when you register a name, the rest is just swapping amount around, if you're not using register commands in the attack, you'll be only attacking the currency part of the coins themselves, it would only have an effect on exchanges if there was an absurd amount of coins hitting the market, obviously you'd be able to sell off at any price and still be profiting so you could crash all the bid orders.
delete
Jump to: