Egad. 81,000 + Transactions Unconfirmed. Again. Ugh! - page 2.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 05, 2017, 05:09:50 AM

But now that i identified it is bitfury that is spaming, a core supporting pool not a BU pool, you say.

No, you have not done that. It is one thing to produce a transaction and it is a completely different thing to mine it.

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 05, 2017, 05:09:50 AM

Quote

Bitfury was recently testing out how to include the most number of transactions per block. Considering that these transactions aren't large in size, it is no surprise that they've been mining them.

Like now all is fine and dandy, you just shrug this "spam" off as "testing" now?
I don't think bitfury need to include 700 of these spam tx's (over 25% of block) in a single block to test how to fill a block.
https://blockchain.info/block/000000000000000000242e1d51b4143acc9058eba5fc9a325457577a639a7e12

It is still spam. You are obviously very misinformed about who is doing what in recent times.

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 05, 2017, 05:09:50 AM

These spam tx's are larger than median, around 380 bytes. It is clearly a bitfury address.
Tx's all created and included instantly, all in bitfury blocks.

This is a core attack, not BU

Doubtful at best until I see proof of this. The average transaction size is well above the median FYI.

You've linked an interesting block though. It may be worth asking them via Twitter to see what's up.

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:50:50 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:46:34 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:34:46 PM

Sending tens of TXs in the same second, and a total of several thousands over a small period of time from yourself - to yourself.

I see. ok, then i guess it is spam. Network is still congested though fundamentally as you can see from the avg blocksize chart.

There is no denying this one. The case that I've presented is very clear and I've also listed potential reasons for it.

Your case did seem very clear - BU was spaming the network for their own gains.
In the other thread you explain why this spam attack might be happening,

Quote from: -ck on March 04, 2017, 10:17:53 PM

Definitely looking into it... I see other pools have mined transactions to the same address; only the ones that were mined on the same block coincided with the same pool (obviously.)

Oh really? i don't see any other pools mining tx's from this address.
But ok, if you have found those blocks i await your forthcoming evidence.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 07:02:25 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:50:50 PM

Side-effect: You can mine absurdly large blocks and DOS everyone. Absurdly high orphan rates are just the cherry on top of the cake.

That is your theory.

I would say that miners have no incentive to allow absurdly large blocks or to engage in behavior that promotes high orphan rates.

That's the whole point of POW. It makes attacking the network exponentially more difficult and expensive than sending a few
thousand transactions through.

There is no theory. These are facts. You don't even understand why Bitcoin has the 'low' orphan rates today. You are also viewing this completely wrong. Let's assume all the miners are being honest (which is a very bad assumption). They have two options:
1) Produce much bigger, yet non-absurdly large blocks -> this solves nothing; spamming is a bit less trivial; mempool is still flooded with spam.
2) Produce absurdly large blocks to minimize mempool size -> high orphan risk, DoS.

A side effect of this is mining centralization as well. You are left with practically an 'ultimatum'; solve nothing & bloat the chain with bigger blocks or solve the problem but practically DoS everyone and risk with higher orphan rates.

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 04, 2017, 07:20:22 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 05:51:13 PM

The Bitcoin network is being attacked by spam again.
https://blockchain.info/address/3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f
31981 transactions. Roll Eyes

Interesting.

All tx paying 0.0001btc fee,
All are straight into a block - no waiting, (are they even in the mempool numbers?)
All blocks found by bitfury.

Bitfury was recently testing out how to include the most number of transactions per block. Considering that these transactions aren't large in size, it is no surprise that they've been mining them.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 04, 2017, 08:04:34 PM

Quote from: -ck on March 04, 2017, 07:43:05 PM

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 04, 2017, 07:20:22 PM

All tx paying 0.0001btc fee,
All are straight into a block - no waiting, (are they even in the mempool numbers?)
All blocks found by bitfury.

There's a good chance they were lingering for a very long time before being mined by bitfury. Just because they're not seen elsewhere doesn't mean they were just sent that instant. Many nodes will simply not have had the transaction in their mempool but they could have even been sent a week ago. While most nodes tends to have the same high fee transactions in their mempool, when the network is busy the lower fee transactions visible on each node are wildly different.

There must be at least an equally good chance they were not lingering in the mempool.
This clearly needs further investigation.

Funny if they are all shown to be in bitfury blocks, unseen by other nodes. (queue jumping)
I haven't got time tonight, maybe you, or someone else will look properly?

No worries, it's all on the blockchain.

Definitely looking into it... I see other pools have mined transactions to the same address; only the ones that were mined on the same block coincided with the same pool (obviously.)

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: -ck on March 04, 2017, 07:43:05 PM

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 04, 2017, 07:20:22 PM

All tx paying 0.0001btc fee,
All are straight into a block - no waiting, (are they even in the mempool numbers?)
All blocks found by bitfury.

There's a good chance they were lingering for a very long time before being mined by bitfury. Just because they're not seen elsewhere doesn't mean they were just sent that instant. Many nodes will simply not have had the transaction in their mempool but they could have even been sent a week ago. While most nodes tends to have the same high fee transactions in their mempool, when the network is busy the lower fee transactions visible on each node are wildly different.

There must be at least an equally good chance they were not lingering in the mempool.
This clearly needs further investigation.

Funny if they are all shown to be in bitfury blocks, unseen by other nodes. (queue jumping)
I haven't got time tonight, maybe you, or someone else will look properly?

No worries, it's all on the blockchain.

-ck

legendary

Activity: 4088

Merit: 1631

Ruu \o/

Quote from: rizzlarolla on March 04, 2017, 07:20:22 PM

All tx paying 0.0001btc fee,
All are straight into a block - no waiting, (are they even in the mempool numbers?)
All blocks found by bitfury.

There's a good chance they were lingering for a very long time before being mined by bitfury. Just because they're not seen elsewhere doesn't mean they were just sent that instant. Many nodes will simply not have had the transaction in their mempool but they could have even been sent a week ago. While most nodes tends to have the same high fee transactions in their mempool, when the network is busy the lower fee transactions visible on each node are wildly different.

rizzlarolla

hero member

Activity: 812

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 05:51:13 PM

The Bitcoin network is being attacked by spam again.
https://blockchain.info/address/3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f
31981 transactions. Roll Eyes

Interesting.

All tx paying 0.0001btc fee,
All are straight into a block - no waiting, (are they even in the mempool numbers?)
All blocks found by bitfury.

Is that correct, already stated or relevant. (i did not check them all, but it seems to be so!)

---

(thought i saw a link to another thread about this, did i miss the link?)

---

Edit. from https://bitcoincore.org/en/segwit_adoption/
#20 Bitfury (segwit) ready mining pool bitcoin core

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:50:50 PM

Side-effect: You can mine absurdly large blocks and DOS everyone. Absurdly high orphan rates are just the cherry on top of the cake.

That is your theory.

I would say that miners have no incentive to allow absurdly large blocks or to engage in behavior that promotes high orphan rates.

That's the whole point of POW. It makes attacking the network exponentially more difficult and expensive than sending a few
thousand transactions through.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3074

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:34:46 PM

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:30:22 PM

Even if it is spam, the fact that they can so easily cripple the network
means capacity needs to grow.

It is almost trivial to spam at any block size limit that the network could possibly operate with.

Proof positive that jonald and the BUcoiners stand behind a dev team coup that wish to encourage the blockchain to grow at the same pace as the spam, and become too large to download for a typical user.

They know full well that no blockchain in 2017 (or any time soon) will be able to handle the transaction demand they are positing, so as to "demonstrate" that decentralised cryptocurrency is flawed. Bitcoin will only fail due to centralisation if the balloon-chain bad actors get their hands on the keys to the codebase.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:46:34 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:34:46 PM

Sending tens of TXs in the same second, and a total of several thousands over a small period of time from yourself - to yourself.

I see. ok, then i guess it is spam. Network is still congested though fundamentally as you can see from the avg blocksize chart.

There is no denying this one. The case that I've presented is very clear and I've also listed potential reasons for it. My definition of spam is also much wider than yours. I'd say that badly implemented shitcoin functionalities such as Komodo Federation something are also spam.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:46:34 PM

if that is true, it makes me even more convinced there should not be any blocksize limit.

Side-effect: You can mine absurdly large blocks and DOS everyone. Absurdly high orphan rates are just the cherry on top of the cake.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 06:34:46 PM

Sending tens of TXs in the same second, and a total of several thousands over a small period of time from yourself - to yourself.

I see. ok, then i guess it is spam. Network is still congested though fundamentally as you can see from the avg blocksize chart.

Quote

It is almost trivial to spam at any block size limit that the network could possibly operate with.

if that is true, it makes me even more convinced there should not be any blocksize limit.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:30:22 PM

What's your proof that it's spam? Even if a few addresses get a lot of
transactions, they may be conducting business or transacting for
any number of reasons.

Sending tens of TXs in the same second, and a total of several thousands over a small period of time from yourself - to yourself. "Such business, very amaze, wow." Roll Eyes

Give me a fucking break. If you can't see it is spam, you are delusional at best.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:30:22 PM

Even if it is spam, the fact that they can so easily cripple the network
means capacity needs to grow.

It is almost trivial to spam at any block size limit that the network could possibly operate with.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

What's your proof that it's spam? Even if a few addresses get a lot of
transactions, they may be conducting business or transacting for
any number of reasons.

Even if it is spam, the fact that they can so easily cripple the network
means capacity needs to grow.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 06:07:56 PM

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 05:51:13 PM

'Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.' - Not this time.

The Bitcoin network is being attacked by spam again.
https://blockchain.info/address/3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f
31981 transactions. Roll Eyes

Spam, or not, the network is fundamentally congested, and it continues to become more and more congested
as more people want to use the network which can only handle a few tx/sec. I hope you are under no delusion about these basic facts.

In case that you want to ignore the basic fact that this is spam then. you are the one under delusion. I acknowledge the following:
1) Demand is about to or already has outweighed block space supply.
2) Some entity is heavily spamming the Bitcoin network for some malicious reason.

The reason for such spam could be:
1) To promote BU (politically motivated).
2) To raise fees (miners which are motivated by greed).
3) Other.

jonald_fyookball

legendary

Activity: 1302

Merit: 1004

Core dev leaves me neg feedback #abuse #political

Quote from: Lauda on March 04, 2017, 05:51:13 PM

'Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.' - Not this time.

The Bitcoin network is being attacked by spam again.
https://blockchain.info/address/3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f
31981 transactions. Roll Eyes

Spam, or not, the network is fundamentally congested, and it continues to become more and more congested
as more people want to use the network which can only handle a few tx/sec. I hope you are under no delusion about these basic facts.

Lauda

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 2965

Terminated.

'Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.' - Not this time.

The Bitcoin network is being attacked by spam again.
https://blockchain.info/address/3QQB6AWxaga6wTs6Xwq8FYppgrGinGu15f
31981 transactions. Roll Eyes

lionheart78

legendary

Activity: 2898

Merit: 1152

Quote from: italianobitcoin on March 04, 2017, 05:04:53 PM

@ people who find them self having a unconfirmed transaction the following links can be very useful.
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count
This link is too see if the network is busy

http://neocashradio.com/blog/how-to-rebroadcast-a-transaction-on-blockchain-info/
This one is handy to rebroadcast your transaction.

Or you can try to accelerate it with viabtc.com/tools/txaccelerator/ this help me alot.

It is really frustrating to wait for your transaction for a very long time without the insurance of getting it confirmed on the next block. With all these delays and fee hike, developer are busy pushing their own agenda instead of getting into agreement and adjust accordingly giving way. I just hope that there will be another group of capable developer that will appear and propose a better solution and fix all this problem.

italianobitcoin

sr. member

Activity: 370

Merit: 250

Forza Italia

@ people who find them self having a unconfirmed transaction the following links can be very useful.
https://blockchain.info/charts/mempool-count
This link is too see if the network is busy

http://neocashradio.com/blog/how-to-rebroadcast-a-transaction-on-blockchain-info/
This one is handy to rebroadcast your transaction.

lurker10

sr. member

Activity: 378

Merit: 250

I've just had a tx confirm in 5 blocks. The recommended priority fee from the service was 350 sat/B, but I was a little stingy and took a chance paying only 200 sat/B. This is ATH for weekend fees.

Carlton Banks

legendary

Activity: 3430

Merit: 3074

Quote from: jonald_fyookball on March 04, 2017, 02:05:42 PM

Uh, no. It will only worsen.

The only way you could know that so confidently is if you were performing the spamming yourself. Is this what you're saying? If not, spare us the Nostradamus routine

Topic: Egad. 81,000 + Transactions Unconfirmed. Again. Ugh! - page 2. (Read 8826 times)