Possible covert mining attack (in progress???)

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: NeuroticFish on July 20, 2021, 07:43:50 AM

While I did buy from AliExpress, I have no experience with actual Alibaba. Good to have means to filter out scammers, but I'll still wait for one more source for the info Wink

Alibaba is still pretty bad. None of the advertised prices for miners are real. I mean they advertise an S19 for 3K and than when you wanna buy it turns out to be 6K or 9K or whatever. It is pretty painful as Alibaba allows this makes the buyer's life a pain. There are a lot of scammers too trying to push you to chat apps and bitcoin prepayment.

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: kano on July 20, 2021, 08:04:37 PM

The trade assurance doesn't work if you are outside china.

It did for me a few weeks back. I mean you wire the USD (to Citi) and supplier only receives it if you confirm receipt. So I think it does now.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: NeuroticFish on July 20, 2021, 07:43:50 AM

Quote from: Gabrics on July 17, 2021, 11:33:19 PM

Not necessarily true as any sane person only buys with Alibaba's trade assurance, scammers filtered out that way.

While I did buy from AliExpress, I have no experience with actual Alibaba. Good to have means to filter out scammers, but I'll still wait for one more source for the info Wink

As a small note, you've broken a little the quoting in that post; maybe you want to fix that.

The trade assurance doesn't work if you are outside china.

NeuroticFish

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 6382

Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!

Quote from: Gabrics on July 17, 2021, 11:33:19 PM

Not necessarily true as any sane person only buys with Alibaba's trade assurance, scammers filtered out that way.

While I did buy from AliExpress, I have no experience with actual Alibaba. Good to have means to filter out scammers, but I'll still wait for one more source for the info Wink

As a small note, you've broken a little the quoting in that post; maybe you want to fix that.

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: kano on July 17, 2021, 07:45:43 PM

Numbers suggest the hash rate start has started to increase towards the end of this diff change that just happened.
I guess they forgot to enable the attack when they switched on some machines? ...

I have high hopes too. Keep that hashrate going up people! Wink

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: NeuroticFish on July 17, 2021, 07:15:22 AM

5% down from 119-120 EH/s is not that worrisome.

120EH is was a spike only. We are around 100EH. Going up now, which is a good sign.
https://www.blockchain.com/charts/hash-rate

Quote from: NeuroticFish on July 17, 2021, 07:15:22 AM

I'll wait until more reliable sources will tell that, especially as (too) many Alibaba sellers are not to be trusted and the chip shortage is not over.

Not necessarily true as any sane person only buys with Alibaba's trade assurance, scammers filtered out that way.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: Gabrics on July 17, 2021, 06:59:24 AM

Quote from: moonstruck on July 17, 2021, 03:21:33 AM

Although as a counterargument, one would expect the decline in hashrate would have happened much faster if it was coordinated.

Theoretically speaking:
It takes time to reconfigure or even factory reset machines. It did happen fast, in a few weeks/epoch. I think that's as fast as it gets if you talk about millions of machines.

Over exaggeration always useful to help someone think their own FUD is true

If we use the term stated "few weeks" and make it 8 weeks,
8 weeks = 4 diff changes (again we'll exaggerate that also since it was a less than 4)
So time wise we are saying since 13-May since the -15.97% diff change started from the previous diff change.
So actually ... 9.4 weeks ... wow amazing how a 'few weeks' can suddenly mean 9.4 weeks ...

4 diff changes = -15.97% -5.30% -27.94 -4.81%
= 25046487590083.3 down to 13672594272814.1 = total 45.4% diff drop
~13.4T drop = ~81.4EH/s

If you go 2 diff changes (4.9 weeks - maybe you could over exaggerate few to be 4.9?) it's -27.94 -4.81%
= 19932791027262.7 down to 13672594272814.1 = total 31.4% diff drop
~6.3T drop = ~38.3EH/s

So I guess we must have two different convert mining attacks?
The first ~half switching off machines more than a few (4.9) weeks ago and the second half switching off machine over the last few (4.9) weeks?

Numbers suggest the hash rate start has started to increase towards the end of this diff change that just happened.
I guess they forgot to enable the attack when they switched on some machines? ...

NeuroticFish

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 6382

Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!

Quote from: Gabrics on July 17, 2021, 06:57:24 AM

Unfortunately difficulty will still drop 5% today. I do believe though it will start increase after this (should).

5% down from 119-120 EH/s is not that worrisome.

Quote from: Gabrics on July 17, 2021, 06:57:24 AM

It seems cheap S17 and S19 are hitting alibaba and sellers are very eager to sell cheaper. So it looks that the gear is reall off!

I'll wait until more reliable sources will tell that, especially as (too) many Alibaba sellers are not to be trusted and the chip shortage is not over.

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: moonstruck on July 17, 2021, 03:21:33 AM

Although as a counterargument, one would expect the decline in hashrate would have happened much faster if it was coordinated.

Theoretically speaking:
It takes time to reconfigure or even factory reset machines. It did happen fast, in a few weeks/epoch. I think that's as fast as it gets if you talk about millions of machines.

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: NeuroticFish on July 16, 2021, 08:11:57 AM

I start to believe that your actual intention was FUD, despite of what you're telling from start.
It was explained long ago that the drop was under 49%. Since then the hash rate has recovered quite a lot (119-120 EH/s these days), and you still seem "worried"...

Nope, I don't want FUD. I think this is a forum for the hardcore users not those running with a FUD.
Unfortunately difficulty will still drop 5% today. I do believe though it will start increase after this (should).

Also this is a possibility forever, so no new reason for FUD, but this time the until now theoretical hashrate is there.

On the bright side and to fight possible FUD;
It seems cheap S17 and S19 are hitting alibaba and sellers are very eager to sell cheaper. So it looks that the gear is reall off!

moonstruck

member

Activity: 125

Merit: 35

Sounds like a plausible scenario to me, there's definitely an incentive to ruin the largest cryptocurrency to promote regulation.
Even with 51% they'd have enough if they are creating a separate chain altogether instead of competing for every block.
They easily could have stockpiled enough equipment or older gear that was taken out of use to get the additional single digit % needed.

Although as a counterargument, one would expect the decline in hashrate would have happened much faster if it was coordinated.

philipma1957

legendary

Activity: 4256

Merit: 8551

'The right to privacy matters'

Well op is wrong but pow may soon be under worldwide attack.

this is on dell website.
six states ban this gear. and it pulls only 250 watts for 3070 or 400 watts for 3090

Quote from: philipma1957 on July 16, 2021, 06:56:21 PM

The ban is in 6 states.
It is for 3070 and for 3080 models

ranochigo

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 4418

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: Gabrics on July 16, 2021, 08:09:36 AM

CCP just needs one pool a few techs and a few nodes to build the alternate chain.

Do you think the community wouldn't react in a way in a timely manner to counter any potential malicious re-orgs and negate the impacts caused by them? The reason why 51% attack is so dangerous is mainly due to the financial motivation, where there might not be enough time for people to react in a timely manner. If you kill off Bitcoin, great! Another crypto takes it's place. So what now?

I believe that the costs for an attack like this, if it is currently on-going has ballooned to the neighbourhood of about 287 million dollars. I've already mentioned it quite a few times, you don't want to do a 51% silently. Proving that you can consistently annoy the hell out of the community by re-organizing blocks every now and then rather than doing a very expensive block re-org achieves the same thing.

NeuroticFish

legendary

Activity: 3668

Merit: 6382

Looking for campaign manager? Contact icopress!

Quote from: Gabrics on July 16, 2021, 08:03:02 AM

No and that's my main worry why I started this thread.
Because now a non game theory interested agent (CCP) may have enough hash power (built by good miners in the past) to pull something like this Sad

I mean not moving it, just using it in it's original place. Probably by the original owners using coersion.

I start to believe that your actual intention was FUD, despite of what you're telling from start.
It was explained long ago that the drop was under 49%. Since then the hash rate has recovered quite a lot (119-120 EH/s these days), and you still seem "worried"...

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: jabowery on July 12, 2021, 09:29:55 PM

We're still not in "probable" territory though. Such a coordinated attack by the CCP requires preventing information leaks out of China and there are just too many miners in China and too many ways for information to leak while protecting identities.

As far as I know the really big mines are so remote that this is doable in China (big MAYBE and as far as I imagine/afraid). Mine operation could be operated by the same simple/trained guys (I mean day by day, like fans etc.) who don't care as long as they get paid. They don't care/know where the hashrate goes. CCP just needs one pool a few techs and a few nodes to build the alternate chain.

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: ranochigo on July 12, 2021, 11:56:19 PM

It is far more scary for a sudden percentage of the hashrate to go offline for an extended period of time.

Yepp

Gabrics

full member

Activity: 193

Merit: 121

Just digging around

Quote from: stompix on July 12, 2021, 07:46:48 AM

Do you really think there will be something after all this chaos?

No and that's my main worry why I started this thread.
Because now a non game theory interested agent (CCP) may have enough hash power (built by good miners in the past) to pull something like this Sad

I mean not moving it, just using it in it's original place. Probably by the original owners using coersion.

kano

legendary

Activity: 4592

Merit: 1851

Linux since 1997 RedHat 4

Quote from: ranochigo on July 13, 2021, 05:26:32 PM

Quote from: mikeywith on July 13, 2021, 04:41:49 PM

performing a 51% attack on bitcoin will only be done to hurt bitcoin, the network is too large for someone to benefit from a double spend or anything else, so ideally, we should be worried about someone who has a lot of money and wants to spend a huge chunk it for the sole purpose of damaging the blockchain, in that case, they would want to do it as silently as possible, not buy announcing on public media like how things are now in China.

Yes. It isn't impossible to mine without telling anyone. Bringing all those equipment online could take weeks. Every second that your equipment aren't running, you're incurring an opportunity cost. That could amount to a few billion, depending on how long you take to acquire the sufficient amount. No one would attack Bitcoin if you have to spend that much money, recouping some of the loss would make the most sense.

It is perfectly possible for them to slowly take them online, under the guise of actually mining them by using a company unaffiliated with the CCP. It is far more suspicious for that much equipment to be deployed in a few weeks than having it spread out over months.

Alas I'd suggest that 'over months' would be minimal months, since the ones moving the hardware, under normal circumstances, ignoring this tin foil hat conspiracy theory, are losing money the whole time.

ranochigo

legendary

Activity: 3038

Merit: 4418

Crypto Swap Exchange

Quote from: mikeywith on July 13, 2021, 04:41:49 PM

performing a 51% attack on bitcoin will only be done to hurt bitcoin, the network is too large for someone to benefit from a double spend or anything else, so ideally, we should be worried about someone who has a lot of money and wants to spend a huge chunk it for the sole purpose of damaging the blockchain, in that case, they would want to do it as silently as possible, not buy announcing on public media like how things are now in China.

Yes. It isn't impossible to mine without telling anyone. Bringing all those equipment online could take weeks. Every second that your equipment aren't running, you're incurring an opportunity cost. That could amount to a few billion, depending on how long you take to acquire the sufficient amount. No one would attack Bitcoin if you have to spend that much money, recouping some of the loss would make the most sense.

It is perfectly possible for them to slowly take them online, under the guise of actually mining them by using a company unaffiliated with the CCP. It is far more suspicious for that much equipment to be deployed in a few weeks than having it spread out over months.

mikeywith

legendary

Activity: 2394

Merit: 6581

be constructive or S.T.F.U

Quote from: ranochigo on July 12, 2021, 11:56:19 PM

Why? Buying and hoarding that much ASICs without using them would be ridiculously expensive

performing a 51% attack on bitcoin will only be done to hurt bitcoin, the network is too large for someone to benefit from a double spend or anything else, so ideally, we should be worried about someone who has a lot of money and wants to spend a huge chunk it for the sole purpose of damaging the blockchain, in that case, they would want to do it as silently as possible, not buy announcing on public media like how things are now in China.

Topic: Possible covert mining attack (in progress???) (Read 628 times)