Pages:
Author

Topic: ==== Eligius, please pay my 200+ BTC ==== (Read 12592 times)

vip
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1145
September 26, 2014, 02:17:27 PM
I'm just a little curious about the 'bad' luck and the fact that Eligius has in credit over 1800BTC
If they've been losing blocks (>400BTC) that would make them over 2200BTC in credit if they got those 'missing' blocks.

+1800BTC doesn't sound like bad luck ... though I could be wrong Smiley

https://blockchain.info/address/18d3HV2bm94UyY4a9DrPfoZ17sXuiDQq2B >477.12965068
https://blockchain.info/address/1ChANGeATMH8dFnj39wGTjfjudUtLspzXr >237.98484501
https://blockchain.info/address/14qgRxmyWwRweGY4mfjB5FRxr3Ak8Weu1w 1000 BTC
https://blockchain.info/address/1BRoZJLeLaR9T4PP2m1FJ5isqgQmhzMKBn 99.999 BTC

... I wonder what other addresses Eligius has ...

Add this one to the list: https://blockchain.info/address/1TrHirgxnRsWJ9aTgh9XZJfsD1W9bFvop
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 504
Dream become broken often
Did Eligius ever hand out the 200btc to its miners?
not to this scammer fuck Tongue and it was just 1 miner Smiley
crashoveride54902 means the 200 BTC we recovered.

Answer is not yet, since it will take quite a bit of code to do still Sad

oh ya duh my bad...been a long week Grin
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
Did Eligius ever hand out the 200btc to its miners?
not to this scammer fuck Tongue and it was just 1 miner Smiley
crashoveride54902 means the 200 BTC we recovered.

Answer is not yet, since it will take quite a bit of code to do still Sad
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 504
Dream become broken often
Did Eligius ever hand out the 200btc to its miners?

not to this scammer fuck Tongue and it was just 1 miner Smiley
sr. member
Activity: 462
Merit: 250
Lux e tenebris
Did Eligius ever hand out the 200btc to its miners?
legendary
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
Gresham's Lawyer
He tried something, he got caught,now he owes 400 BTC and is trying to refocus the discussion away from that fact.
QFT

Sure he does. He could even 51% attack p2pool to get up to ~200% PPS (at the expense of everyone else).

Could you please explain a 51% p2pool attack in more detail? I mean, lot of people believe, that p2pool is the most decentralized mining option available, and you state, that a 51% attack could be done to p2pool?

An "obvious" one would be making it so nodes ignore a forked chain more than 'X' shares deep, if it all pays out to the same address (indicating somebody forked from the chain to build a longer one that only pays themselves), though all that you'd have to do to combat that is cycle through addresses when making your fork.

In other words, p2pool users would be mining a block which pays almost the entire reward to the attacker, even though they've only done 51% of the actual work.

The difference is a 51% attack on the p2pool chain would be immediately obvious to all miners monitoring it - p2pool finds a block, but no payment is made since the attacker has substituted their own btc addresses into the sharechain, instead of the legitimate miners.

In this event, I imagine miners would just jump ship, if a better solution isn't implemented by then. Until then, though, it still has its advantages.

The "obvious" defense is too easily countered by new addresses for each block.  Addresses are zero cost.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
★☆★Bitin.io★☆★
He tried something, he got caught,now he owes 400 BTC and is trying to refocus the discussion away from that fact.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 1000
Hmm, that makes sense to me. So, there is no way of fighting against mining centralization? I thought p2pool is a decent solution...
Sure, there's getblocktemplate, a decentralised client-server mining protocol.
Basically all the positives of p2pool without the negatives.
Just needs more time to finish implementing it...

The difference is a 51% attack on the p2pool chain would be immediately obvious to all miners monitoring it - p2pool finds a block, but no payment is made since the attacker has substituted their own btc addresses into the sharechain, instead of the legitimate miners.

In this event, I imagine miners would just jump ship, if a better solution isn't implemented by then. Until then, though, it still has its advantages.
Just like all the miners jumped ship from Arsbitcoin when it forked off the blockchain? Or when it shutdown?
Or like when they jumped ship when 0.8-based pools forked off the main bitcoin blockchain?
Or like when they jumped ship from Deepbit when it stopped mining valid blocks?

Sadly, most miners don't pay attention.

Maybe a marginal number don't pay attention, but enough do. In this event, the block chain is still uncompromised and only P2Pool is naffed.
legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 1186
Hmm, that makes sense to me. So, there is no way of fighting against mining centralization? I thought p2pool is a decent solution...
Sure, there's getblocktemplate, a decentralised client-server mining protocol.
Basically all the positives of p2pool without the negatives.
Just needs more time to finish implementing it...

The difference is a 51% attack on the p2pool chain would be immediately obvious to all miners monitoring it - p2pool finds a block, but no payment is made since the attacker has substituted their own btc addresses into the sharechain, instead of the legitimate miners.

In this event, I imagine miners would just jump ship, if a better solution isn't implemented by then. Until then, though, it still has its advantages.
Just like all the miners jumped ship from Arsbitcoin when it forked off the blockchain? Or when it shutdown?
Or like when they jumped ship when 0.8-based pools forked off the main bitcoin blockchain?
Or like when they jumped ship from Deepbit when it stopped mining valid blocks?

Sadly, most miners don't pay attention.
hero member
Activity: 994
Merit: 1000
Sure he does. He could even 51% attack p2pool to get up to ~200% PPS (at the expense of everyone else).

Could you please explain a 51% p2pool attack in more detail? I mean, lot of people believe, that p2pool is the most decentralized mining option available, and you state, that a 51% attack could be done to p2pool?

An "obvious" one would be making it so nodes ignore a forked chain more than 'X' shares deep, if it all pays out to the same address (indicating somebody forked from the chain to build a longer one that only pays themselves), though all that you'd have to do to combat that is cycle through addresses when making your fork.

In other words, p2pool users would be mining a block which pays almost the entire reward to the attacker, even though they've only done 51% of the actual work.

The difference is a 51% attack on the p2pool chain would be immediately obvious to all miners monitoring it - p2pool finds a block, but no payment is made since the attacker has substituted their own btc addresses into the sharechain, instead of the legitimate miners.

In this event, I imagine miners would just jump ship, if a better solution isn't implemented by then. Until then, though, it still has its advantages.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
★☆★Bitin.io★☆★
He tried something, he got caught,now he owes 400 BTC and is trying to refocus the discussion away from that fact.
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
Hmm, that makes sense to me. So, there is no way of fighting against mining centralization? I thought p2pool is a decent solution...

Thanks eleuthria

I'm unable to think of a way to fix this problem, it's essentially the same problem as Bitcoin itself has when it comes to a 51% attack.  If p2pool did something like limit the size of a sharechain re-org to only so many shares deep, it would work most of the time, but it would fail if there was ever any major communication issues between countries, essentially forking p2pool into multiple p2pools because they would refuse to come back to a consensus.
hero member
Activity: 784
Merit: 504
Dream become broken often
Sure he does. He could even 51% attack p2pool to get up to ~200% PPS (at the expense of everyone else).

Could you please explain a 51% p2pool attack in more detail? I mean, lot of people believe, that p2pool is the most decentralized mining option available, and you state, that a 51% attack could be done to p2pool?

p2pool is like a miniature Bitcoin blockchain.  If you had 51% of the p2pool hash rate, you could (more often than not) force your own shares into the sharechain instead of someone elses by forking it until your chain was longer.  I'm not sure what, if any, precautions are present in p2pool to prevent somebody from purposely forking the sharechain in their favor.

An "obvious" one would be making it so nodes ignore a forked chain more than 'X' shares deep, if it all pays out to the same address (indicating somebody forked from the chain to build a longer one that only pays themselves), though all that you'd have to do to combat that is cycle through addresses when making your fork.

In other words, p2pool users would be mining a block which pays almost the entire reward to the attacker, even though they've only done 51% of the actual work.

Hmm, that makes sense to me. So, there is no way of fighting against mining centralization? I thought p2pool is a decent solution...

Thanks eleuthria

not really...in the end, big money will centralize it whether we want it to happen or not...unless the btc coders force them to decentralize idk
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
Sure he does. He could even 51% attack p2pool to get up to ~200% PPS (at the expense of everyone else).

Could you please explain a 51% p2pool attack in more detail? I mean, lot of people believe, that p2pool is the most decentralized mining option available, and you state, that a 51% attack could be done to p2pool?

p2pool is like a miniature Bitcoin blockchain.  If you had 51% of the p2pool hash rate, you could (more often than not) force your own shares into the sharechain instead of someone elses by forking it until your chain was longer.  I'm not sure what, if any, precautions are present in p2pool to prevent somebody from purposely forking the sharechain in their favor.

An "obvious" one would be making it so nodes ignore a forked chain more than 'X' shares deep, if it all pays out to the same address (indicating somebody forked from the chain to build a longer one that only pays themselves), though all that you'd have to do to combat that is cycle through addresses when making your fork.

In other words, p2pool users would be mining a block which pays almost the entire reward to the attacker, even though they've only done 51% of the actual work.

Hmm, that makes sense to me. So, there is no way of fighting against mining centralization? I thought p2pool is a decent solution...

Thanks eleuthria
legendary
Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007
Sure he does. He could even 51% attack p2pool to get up to ~200% PPS (at the expense of everyone else).

Could you please explain a 51% p2pool attack in more detail? I mean, lot of people believe, that p2pool is the most decentralized mining option available, and you state, that a 51% attack could be done to p2pool?

p2pool is like a miniature Bitcoin blockchain.  If you had 51% of the p2pool hash rate, you could (more often than not) force your own shares into the sharechain instead of someone elses by forking it until your chain was longer.  I'm not sure what, if any, precautions are present in p2pool to prevent somebody from purposely forking the sharechain in their favor.

An "obvious" one would be making it so nodes ignore a forked chain more than 'X' shares deep, if it all pays out to the same address (indicating somebody forked from the chain to build a longer one that only pays themselves), though all that you'd have to do to combat that is cycle through addresses when making your fork.

In other words, p2pool users would be mining a block which pays almost the entire reward to the attacker, even though they've only done 51% of the actual work.
full member
Activity: 154
Merit: 100
Sure he does. He could even 51% attack p2pool to get up to ~200% PPS (at the expense of everyone else).

Could you please explain a 51% p2pool attack in more detail? I mean, lot of people believe, that p2pool is the most decentralized mining option available, and you state, that a 51% attack could be done to p2pool?
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1007
Does block withdraw method work against p2pool?
You mean block withholding.
Yes, it does.
It's actually worse there because nobody can stop it.

Withholding yes. Thank you.
legendary
Activity: 2338
Merit: 1124
Maybe a dumb question: If a share is not valid at pool "A", would it also be invalid at pool "B"?
legendary
Activity: 1344
Merit: 1024
Mine at Jonny's Pool
It's my mistake.
If an attacker withholds blocks but transmits shares he gets payouts for the shares. Just in p2pool.

In every pool.  Not just p2pool.  That's the whole concept behind a block withholding attack: the attacker submits shares that are counted towards payouts, but if a share would satisfy the BTC block, that share is not submitted, and therefore, the block is not solved and no 25BTC reward.
sr. member
Activity: 244
Merit: 250
It's my mistake.
If an attacker withholds blocks but transmits shares he gets payouts for the shares. Just in p2pool.
Pages:
Jump to: