Topic: ★★DigiByte|极特币★★[DGB]✔ Core v6.16.5.1 - DigiShield, DigiSpeed, Segwit - page 1173. (Read 3058907 times)

On Cryptsy  a few million DGB was sold at 16 sat within the past 2 hours or so.  Roughly .8 BTC worth if I had to guess

HR, which driver are you using for your cards? I think my 280x might have to go back to 13.12 for the optimized kernel....from what im reading anyway.  From my understanding, Groestl favors more of the older generation of cards and the newer gen cards need some tweaking to compete.

The sell pressure has just increased at 16 SAT. Time to buy more.

Algo Hashrate Equivalents

(With configurations tweaked so that a target temperature of 80º is respected and not repeatedly hit (where the cards settle into a 78º +-1º temp and work nicely with fan speeds that average 50% when using groestl, but run much hotter and faster, respectively, using the other algos).

SHA-256 = 1 GH/s  
Scrypt = 1 MH/s  
Groestl = 40 MH/s  
Skein = 120 MH/s  
Qubit = 5.65 MH/s  

Does anyone have differing stats?

@Arsenay, yesterday I pulled down 55,827 with only four 7950's - and I've averaged 57,953 over the last 4 days (with cool running, energy efficient, -k myriadcoin-groestl). 

My reading of things is that the further away you get from the original specs and coding, the wider you're opening Pandora's Box. I found this thread to be very instructive: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/bug-time-warp-exploits-why-is-the-attack-chain-accepted-608893

Hello Jared and community,

I hope this attack will never take place... as long as hash rate is high, the probability is quite low... but still possible...
Imagine if it was combined with %51 attack, then he can quickly mine at a very low difficulty to gather a lot of coins in a short while.

I think this fix should be the priority.  And this is not only for DGB, every coin using 1 block retargeting should consider this, especially those who are still on KGW.

Ref 1. https://litecoin.info/Time_warp_attack (Also check the second REF for eliminating the attack on litecoin )
Ref 2. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6016831
Ref 3. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6746665 (Also skim the whole page)

And finally Myriad made their fixes. Should talk to them and get this done ASAP.
Ref 4. http://www.cryptoarticles.com/crypto-news/mandatory-myriadcoin-upgrade-includes-stealth-addresses-new-weighting-algo-more

I know in bitcoin, it is impossible to take advantage of this crack since there is always created blocks in a quite fast manner.
However, those coins who have this problem in common are using the same bitcoin source.

Cheers.

Algo Hashrate Equivalents

(With configurations tweaked so that a target temperature of 80º is respected and not repeatedly hit (where the cards settle into a 78º +-1º temp and work nicely with fan speeds that average 50% when using groestl, but run much hotter and faster, respectively, using the other algos).

SHA-256 = 1 GH/s  
Scrypt = 1 MH/s  
Groestl = 40 MH/s  
Skein = 120 MH/s  
Qubit = 5.65 MH/s  

Does anyone have differing stats?

@Arsenay, yesterday I pulled down 55,827 with only four 7950's - and I've averaged 57,953 over the last 4 days (with cool running, energy efficient, -k myriadcoin-groestl). 

Hello Jared and community,

I hope this attack will never take place... as long as hash rate is high, the probability is quite low... but still possible...
Imagine if it was combined with %51 attack, then he can quickly mine at a very low difficulty to gather a lot of coins in a short while.

I think this fix should be the priority.  And this is not only for DGB, every coin using 1 block retargeting should consider this, especially those who are still on KGW.

Ref 1. https://litecoin.info/Time_warp_attack (Also check the second REF for eliminating the attack on litecoin )
Ref 2. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6016831
Ref 3. https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.6746665 (Also skim the whole page)

And finally Myriad made their fixes. Should talk to them and get this done ASAP.
Ref 4. http://www.cryptoarticles.com/crypto-news/mandatory-myriadcoin-upgrade-includes-stealth-addresses-new-weighting-algo-more

I know in bitcoin, it is impossible to take advantage of this crack since there is always created blocks in a quite fast manner.
However, those coins who have this problem in common are using the same bitcoin source.

Cheers.

Can anyone confirm that Digihash is hosted in New Jersey? I thought it was going to be in Texas or something originally but since my ping time is a lot lower than when it first went live I am going to switch over.  Plus, supporting the devs =).  

Also a thumbs up for http://birdspool.no-ip.org:5021/static/stats/ that p2pool has been rock solid and birds a cool guy that I've gotten a chance to talk to a few times.  If you are really concerned about your fees, I believe birdspool is only .5% if im not mistaken.


Its my opinion we really should be spreading the hash around by supporting the Devs pool or boosting the P2pool pools.

Is that your polite way of saying "Thanks, but we're just gonna merge Myriad's change"?

Please do comment on these "additional protections".  As far as I can tell, the difficulty adjustment algorithm was copied verbatim from myriad, and then nMaxAdjustDown and nMaxAdjustUp were increased by a factor of 10.

"Moving along fine" is debatable when every single algorithm's difficulty regularly cycles by a factor of 10.  It just gives the illusion of moving along fine because at any given time there's usually at least 1 algorithm going through its low phase.

We just saw your pull request! Thank you for contributing it! Long story short, we are vulnerable as well to the same attack if our net hash rate falls too low. But we do, however, have some additional protections built in the Myriad does not. 

We are going to issue a hard fork in the next few days. We are going to implement some changes to significantly mitigate this problem. In the mean time our chain is moving along fine, but we can use all the hash we can get. It is very likely who ever was behind the Myriad attack will attempt the same with DigiByte. And it does in fact appear that they have already tried / been trying.

Lawsky: NYDFS Considering Transitional BitLicense for Small Startups

Pete Rizzo (@pete_rizzo_) | Published on November 3, 2014 at 02:00 GMT   

The New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) has announced that it is considering creating a special type of transitional BitLicense tailored to the needs of small businesses and startups.

The special licensure would allow bitcoin startups that meet certain criteria to operate within a more flexible regulatory framework for a yet-to-be-determined period of time, during which examinations on the business would be conducted.

The formal announcement of the NYDFS’ shift in strategy came during superintendent Benjamin M Lawsky's keynote speech on the opening day of Money 20/20, an ongoing five-day conference to feature talks from other industry luminaries including Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss; Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire and Blockchain CEO Nicolas Cary, among others.

In prepared remarks, Lawsky framed his department’s decision as one that illustrates how the NYDFS is seeking to respond to criticisms it has faced from the bitcoin community during the regulation’s 90-day comment period.

Lawsky said:

    “One issue that we heard about consistently throughout the entire comment period is a concern about the compliance costs of regulation on new or fledgling virtual currency enterprises. [...] There has to be a way for startups to start up and play by the rules without getting crushed by huge compliance costs.”

In addition, Lawsky announced that the NYDFS may also seek to designate a “small group of specialized examiners” that will oversee startups and their license applications and thereby help ease the burden for startups.
Determining factors

Lawsky went on to present a list of factors that the NYDFS may consider when deciding whether to grant its proposed Transitional BitLicense.

Factors included:

    Anticipated transactional and business volume
    The mitigating risk controls already in place (eg, a bond or other insurance)
    The nature and scope of the applicant’s business
    Whether the entity is registered with FinCEN as a money services business.

Lawsky added that the NYDFS’ latest proposal was inspired by the host of letters his agency has received from the bitcoin community. Further, he remarked that he hopes the letters will soon be made public.

Lawsky remarked that he hopes the NYDFS will be able to “strike a balance” between maintaining consumer protections and enabling the bitcoin industry to grow.

“Our hope that innovative new companies – committed to doing things the right way – will want to do a lot of business in New York, the financial capital of the world,” he said.
Commitment to consumers

Throughout the remarks, Lawsky stressed that despite easing the burden for bitcoin startups, his department remains committed to protecting consumers from illicit activity.

“We cannot turn away from the vital task of preventing money laundering – which facilitates sometimes unspeakable crimes,” Lawksy said, striking a similar refrain as at the NYDFS BitLicense hearings this January.

Lawsky stressed that digital currency startups that engaged in misconduct would face significant penalties, and that all firms operating under any version of the License would have to meet strong anti-money laundering (AML) and capital standards. However, Lawsky suggested that there is a potential for startups to outsource such compliance risks, adding:

“We have faced similar issues among the smaller, community banks we regulate. We recognize that if a financial firm has 12 employees – and nine of them are compliance officers – that is not a winning business model."

Lawsky concluded by suggesting that the latest BitLicense revision would soon be made available for public comment and that a final version would be released this January.

I don't see how that follows.  It's really the exact same thing but with max adjustments increased 10x.  Historically this has led to insane difficulty swings (even at constant hashrates) which can be difficult to distinguish from actual tomfoolery without going in and comparing timestamps. One slight advantage is that -log(max_diff_down)/log(min_diff_up) is 1.94 for Myriad but only 1.5 for DigiByte, meaning the attacker would need a slightly greater share of the hashpower to attack DigiByte.  Since DGB has a higher hash rate anyway, a successful attack seems less likely.

BTW I've updated my pull request on github.

Since our difficulty adjustment is different than Myriad we have some more protection for this.