Is the Bitcoin falling ? DDOS breaks almost every major Pool

bcearl

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 103

Quote from: jackjack on July 09, 2011, 09:52:46 AM

Quote from: bcearl on July 09, 2011, 09:44:11 AM

Bitcoin without pools would be even harder to break. Pools are a threat, DDoSing pools is helping bitcoin against that threat.

Aren't you going a little too far?

I don't support DDoS. But its just nothing we have to worry about.

Even if mining pools are DDoSed, the people who actually have the mining hardware will be interested in continuing mining (because else their hardware is wasted). Even if the number of miners drops significantly, Bitcoin will be able to operate -- you just have to wait a certain time (depending on how much the hashrate drops) longer for confirmations. After difficulty recalculation, everything is like it should be again.

Nescio

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

Quote from: TraderTimm on July 09, 2011, 06:04:16 PM

We'll end up learning our lesson if the major pools get DDoSed one day, simultaneously. The way things have been escalating, I wouldn't be too surprised if this happened.

That's only a problem if there are no smaller independent pools and individual miners left and a concerted attack is mounted in the form of a large attacking pool trying to subvert the blockchain, but this means a lot of investment and once the big pools return they might have done some work that will invalidate the bogus links in the chain anyway. In fact, if it comes down to a catastrophic event once they are back the big pools could decide to cooperate on fixing the blockchain (sort of like a Mt. Gox rollback

).

The average botnet operator will gain more by simply participating (have their own pool if other big pools reject them).

TraderTimm

legendary

Activity: 2408

Merit: 1121

We'll end up learning our lesson if the major pools get DDoSed one day, simultaneously. The way things have been escalating, I wouldn't be too surprised if this happened.

Nescio

jr. member

Activity: 56

Merit: 1

Quote from: walidzohair on July 09, 2011, 08:16:43 AM

I am talking about the worst case scenario. Let us say three of the major pools have been taken over and hacked! then what! a faulty blocks can be introduced!

not just slowing the total network computation power due to DDoS. But the whole thing can be wiped out!

That's not how it works, thankfully. You can grab all of the coin creation and prevent transactions from going through (until you get nuked from orbit), but you can't reverse most of the transactions (exponentially more difficult the further you want to go back) or steal people's balances because you don't have their private keys to sign transactions with. For other things you could do you also need control of the majority of the clients, which controlling all the pools in the world will not help with.

jackjack

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1233

May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage

Quote from: bcearl on July 09, 2011, 09:44:11 AM

Bitcoin without pools would be even harder to break. Pools are a threat, DDoSing pools is helping bitcoin against that threat.

Aren't you going a little too far?

bcearl

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 103

Bitcoin without pools would be even harder to break. Pools are a threat, DDoSing pools is helping bitcoin against that threat.

joepie91

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: walidzohair on July 09, 2011, 08:24:52 AM

Quote from: joepie91 on July 09, 2011, 08:22:33 AM

Quote from: walidzohair on July 09, 2011, 08:16:43 AM

Quote from: randomguy7 on July 07, 2011, 07:34:36 PM

The only problem with this is that it won't work. You should read the tech paper.

That is why I said we should CHANGE the default protocol. And yes it affects the overall network computation power!

And as far as I understand from the technical paper. Bitcoin can be taken out if you can afford computation power larger than the sum of the network.

I am talking about the worst case scenario. Let us say three of the major pools have been taken over and hacked! then what! a faulty blocks can be introduced!

not just slowing the total network computation power due to DDoS. But the whole thing can be wiped out!

what I am saying is that we can convert the whole network to one large gigantic pool with all the miners working WITH each others. And the only things that can take this out is to block the BTC traffic all over the internet.

So everyone is working in cooperation Yet every one will be still competing for larger share. umm maybe extra digits can be introduced as 8 digits after decimal point might be not enough.

Away from how much hard effort to see this accomplished. but what will be the disadvantages of this suggestion ?

Bold red text is really not going to make your point any more valid, or your post any more readable.

My apologies but is it against the forum policies ?

otherwise i do nto think your post is relevant

I have no idea if it's against the forum policies, I'm just trying to make a point that it's extremely annoying and hard to read.

That something is not outright forbidden does not mean you should do it.

walidzohair

full member

Activity: 184

Merit: 100

Quote from: joepie91 on July 09, 2011, 08:22:33 AM

Quote from: walidzohair on July 09, 2011, 08:16:43 AM

Quote from: randomguy7 on July 07, 2011, 07:34:36 PM

The only problem with this is that it won't work. You should read the tech paper.

That is why I said we should CHANGE the default protocol. And yes it affects the overall network computation power!

And as far as I understand from the technical paper. Bitcoin can be taken out if you can afford computation power larger than the sum of the network.

I am talking about the worst case scenario. Let us say three of the major pools have been taken over and hacked! then what! a faulty blocks can be introduced!

not just slowing the total network computation power due to DDoS. But the whole thing can be wiped out!

what I am saying is that we can convert the whole network to one large gigantic pool with all the miners working WITH each others. And the only things that can take this out is to block the BTC traffic all over the internet.

So everyone is working in cooperation Yet every one will be still competing for larger share. umm maybe extra digits can be introduced as 8 digits after decimal point might be not enough.

Away from how much hard effort to see this accomplished. but what will be the disadvantages of this suggestion ?

Bold red text is really not going to make your point any more valid, or your post any more readable.

My apologies but is it against the forum policies ?

otherwise i do nto think your post is relevant

joepie91

sr. member

Activity: 294

Merit: 250

Quote from: walidzohair on July 09, 2011, 08:16:43 AM

Quote from: randomguy7 on July 07, 2011, 07:34:36 PM

The only problem with this is that it won't work. You should read the tech paper.

That is why I said we should CHANGE the default protocol. And yes it affects the overall network computation power!

And as far as I understand from the technical paper. Bitcoin can be taken out if you can afford computation power larger than the sum of the network.

I am talking about the worst case scenario. Let us say three of the major pools have been taken over and hacked! then what! a faulty blocks can be introduced!

not just slowing the total network computation power due to DDoS. But the whole thing can be wiped out!

what I am saying is that we can convert the whole network to one large gigantic pool with all the miners working WITH each others. And the only things that can take this out is to block the BTC traffic all over the internet.

So everyone is working in cooperation Yet every one will be still competing for larger share. umm maybe extra digits can be introduced as 8 digits after decimal point might be not enough.

Away from how much hard effort to see this accomplished. but what will be the disadvantages of this suggestion ?

Bold red text is really not going to make your point any more valid, or your post any more readable.

walidzohair

full member

Activity: 184

Merit: 100

Quote from: randomguy7 on July 07, 2011, 07:34:36 PM

The only problem with this is that it won't work. You should read the tech paper.

That is why I said we should CHANGE the default protocol. And yes it affects the overall network computation power!

And as far as I understand from the technical paper. Bitcoin can be taken out if you can afford computation power larger than the sum of the network.

I am talking about the worst case scenario. Let us say three of the major pools have been taken over and hacked! then what! a faulty blocks can be introduced!

not just slowing the total network computation power due to DDoS. But the whole thing can be wiped out!

what I am saying is that we can convert the whole network to one large gigantic pool with all the miners working WITH each others. And the only things that can take this out is to block the BTC traffic all over the internet.

So everyone is working in cooperation Yet every one will be still competing for larger share. umm maybe extra digits can be introduced as 8 digits after decimal point might be not enough.

Away from how much hard effort to see this accomplished. but what will be the disadvantages of this suggestion ?

SlipperySlope

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 501

Stephen Reed

Quote from: Batouzo on July 08, 2011, 02:45:58 AM

I do not agree solo mining must be bad.

....

It is the risk of getting 0 BTC what scares people it seems.

Exactly, the expected returns may be better for solo mining but the variance of results makes it into a lottery. The great majority of miners prefer the rather steady returns yielded by the lowest-variance, largest mining pools - despite the slightly lower expected return.

I generated two blocks as a solo CPU miner a year ago, but would never consider solo mining today.

Batouzo

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

I do not agree solo mining must be bad.

Are people always more afraid of loss then thinking of possible extra profit? (afair studies say that yes, x2 more)

Look at it this way, assume 2.6 GHash solo.
Assume diff doubling each month (same affect as +30% but easier calculations)

You will on avg. get a block once per month.
You have 50% to get a block in 30 days.
(http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/old_calculator.php)

So in pool after a month you get 50 BTC, then 25 BTC, 12.5, 6.25, 3.12 = 96.8 BTC
after more month you would get close to 100 and then some pennies monthly.

So 100 BTC in 5 months in pool.
Solo, you have 50% chance to get in this time same 100 BTC or even 150 or perhaps 200 BTC.
Also you could get 250 or 300 is very lucky - but also you can get just 50 or even 0 if very unlucky.

Mining Solo is NOT less profitable at it does NOT mean you will get nothing - you may get nothing but you may also get much more then from pool, even +50% more is not that unlikely.

It is the risk of getting 0 BTC what scares people it seems.

FreeMoney

legendary

Activity: 1246

Merit: 1014

Strength in numbers

Quote from: Tronlet on July 07, 2011, 10:12:25 PM

I thought of a more elegant way to illustrate my original point.

Let's say there are large groups of people who all play the lottery, with the promise to split their winnings if they win.

Saying that if these groups were taken down, the lottery would fail, is just as silly as saying that if pools go down, Bitcoin will fail.

Just to play devil's advocate. If everyone playing the lottery was doing it in pools then we wouldn't know the future of lotteries after lottery pools fell. Maybe people would switch to going alone, maybe they would quit.

Regardless, 'pools' the idea aren't going anywhere. Some particular pools might, but that's as relevant as a few office lottery pools being canceled.

Hook^

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on July 07, 2011, 10:22:37 PM

Quote from: Tronlet on July 07, 2011, 10:12:25 PM

I thought of a more elegant way to illustrate my original point.

Let's say there are large groups of people who all play the lottery, with the promise to split their winnings if they win.

Saying that if these groups were taken down, the lottery would fail, is just as silly as saying that if pools go down, Bitcoin will fail.

Most people play the lottery alone. Most people don't mine bitcoins alone.

Mining solo at this difficulty level *is* a lottery. Your chances of ever earning anything are very, very low.

Well, not very, very low. You would on average win one block of 50 coins every 50 days mining solo if you had 2.7 GH/S of power and the difficulty didn't increase. In fact over a year or so, you will on average come out ahead on your own rather than pooling because of the pooling charge. The problem is that difficulty has been increasing so quickly that you are chasing a target that moves faster than you can catch.

Pooling basically allows you to pull the future 50 coin win into the present so that you can mine at the current difficulty level instead of the much larger future one. The price to be paid for this benefit is the pool charge.

Tronlet

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on July 07, 2011, 10:22:37 PM

Quote from: Tronlet on July 07, 2011, 10:12:25 PM

I thought of a more elegant way to illustrate my original point.

Let's say there are large groups of people who all play the lottery, with the promise to split their winnings if they win.

Saying that if these groups were taken down, the lottery would fail, is just as silly as saying that if pools go down, Bitcoin will fail.

Most people play the lottery alone. Most people don't mine bitcoins alone.

Mining solo at this difficulty level *is* a lottery. Your chances of ever earning anything are very, very low.

These were theoretical groups. The point is the same.

Jack of Diamonds

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

Quote from: Tronlet on July 07, 2011, 10:12:25 PM

I thought of a more elegant way to illustrate my original point.

Let's say there are large groups of people who all play the lottery, with the promise to split their winnings if they win.

Saying that if these groups were taken down, the lottery would fail, is just as silly as saying that if pools go down, Bitcoin will fail.

Most people play the lottery alone. Most people don't mine bitcoins alone.

Mining solo at this difficulty level *is* a lottery. Your chances of ever earning anything are very, very low.

Tronlet

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

I thought of a more elegant way to illustrate my original point.

Let's say there are large groups of people who all play the lottery, with the promise to split their winnings if they win.

Saying that if these groups were taken down, the lottery would fail, is just as silly as saying that if pools go down, Bitcoin will fail.

1bitc0inplz

member

Activity: 112

Merit: 10

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on July 07, 2011, 09:41:04 PM

The hash rate has actually gone down massively today.
Network total rate is at 5.4 blocks per hour.

Good point. I haven't really tracked the blocks/hour stat, and Bitcoin Watch's network hash rate graph looks screwy.

I do find it odd then that so many people would leave their miners idle rather than to setup a backup pool, or 2 or 3.

All things considered, though, of the pools that stayed online today every one of them looked like they enjoyed a growth in hash rate. So, at least a non-negligible amount of miners took precaution and picked backup pools.

imperi

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 101

Quote from: Jack of Diamonds on July 07, 2011, 09:41:04 PM

The hash rate has actually gone down massively today.
Network total rate is at 5.4 blocks per hour.

Also, all the big pools have had insanely long rounds today (just look at deepbit or bitcoins.lc history in the last 24 hours).
It *could* be luck, but if it is, it's a hell of a coincidence.

Currency isn't inflating as quickly, sky is falling?

Jack of Diamonds

sr. member

Activity: 252

Merit: 251

The hash rate has actually gone down massively today.
Network total rate is at 5.4 blocks per hour.

Also, all the big pools have had insanely long rounds today (just look at deepbit or bitcoins.lc history in the last 24 hours).
It *could* be luck, but if it is, it's a hell of a coincidence.

All of them have gone through the longest round in a month today. Even the small ones like triplemining.com are undergoing ridiculous rounds.

Topic: Is the Bitcoin falling ? DDOS breaks almost every major Pool (Read 4253 times)