Those with an incentive to attack the bitcoin network - page 2.

acquafredda

legendary

Activity: 1316

Merit: 1481

Quote from: Borisz on July 14, 2015, 08:25:14 AM

Quote from: johnyj on July 13, 2015, 07:27:13 PM

Increased activity of coin transaction will just make coin less available in circulation, thus raise its value. The more you attack the network, the stronger it grows, it absorbs all the energy that fed into it

I would consider the reduced speed of the network and the increased fees as a negative effect. Its kind of like saying that the frozen bank accounts in Greece have higher value because there is less money in circulation. I don't think this is the way to increase the value of a currency/asset. Not by a attack by any means.

Also the price hasn't sky-rocketed either due to the spam. Its a bit higher yes, but
1. Is the slight increase in price actually due to the spam?
2. Will it last?
3. Is it worth it to have it at the cost of increased fees and longer transaction times?

I would be happier without people spamming the network.

I definitely agree with you.

I chose BTC over fiat money since I believed (I was wrong) that it can't be controlled. But, as far as I can see it can be controlled by something or someone who has enough power to control it.

It's like being against banks again.

This is such pity my friends.

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: arallmuus on July 16, 2015, 03:18:06 AM

Quote from: Amph on July 16, 2015, 03:09:10 AM

but there is a simply solution, stop feeding them with larger fees, wait more for your confirmation, they will end this scam eventually

This is absolutely ridicilous. No one would like to wait for days just to get the transaction confirmed ( I assumed you dont as well if it is an important transaction ) and thus this spam will keep on encouraging people to increase the miners fee or else they would wait for days, It cant be avoided at this stages and the miners fee will keep be increased to ensure transaction gets confirmed faster. The golden ratio attack may sounds like a conspiracy theories however it is possible to do so if you read it thoroughly

P.S : waiting for the complete math for the golden ratio attack

until now i didn't faced any delay with any TX that i've done in the past few days, and i'm using the standard fee, many are using the customizable fee of 1k or less and many other are using the automatic fee, which is not good for now

there are some cases with high fee and long delay but they are the minority, isolated cases, one could thing that the reason behind those cases is not only this scam attack, but it could be related to misfortune about the average time for resolving a block

arallmuus

legendary

Activity: 2562

Merit: 1414

Quote from: Amph on July 16, 2015, 03:09:10 AM

but there is a simply solution, stop feeding them with larger fees, wait more for your confirmation, they will end this scam eventually

This is absolutely ridicilous. No one would like to wait for days just to get the transaction confirmed ( I assumed you dont as well if it is an important transaction ) and thus this spam will keep on encouraging people to increase the miners fee or else they would wait for days, It cant be avoided at this stages and the miners fee will keep be increased to ensure transaction gets confirmed faster. The golden ratio attack may sounds like a conspiracy theories however it is possible to do so if you read it thoroughly

P.S : waiting for the complete math for the golden ratio attack

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: ?? on ??

This is a Golden Ratio Attack.

They aren't doing this to attack Bitcoin. They are doing this because it is profitable. They will continue to do it forever because it will continue to be profitable.

The EFFECT is an attack on Bitcoin.

They are creating an artificial shortage of bandwidth because doing so is profitable.

Any miner who controls more than 38% of mining power makes back enough of the fees he spends on keeping a backlog full, that by driving up the price of fees for other transactions, he can make more money from legitimate transactions than the "extra" fees he spends.

This is true for as long as the blocks are more than half full of legitimate transactions, so in the long run transaction fees will approach that point. Whatever people will pay for half a megabyte of "real" transactions per block,

There is a miner who controls more than 38% of the hashing power. Therefore we will have a backlog of transactions to force fees higher for as long as that remains true.

Here's where I wrote more about it:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nothing-to-see-here-move-along-1125214

there is always profit behind illegit things not suprised at all

but there is a simply solution, stop feeding them with larger fees, wait more for your confirmation, they will end this scam eventually

i can't think of something else at the moment

pooya87

legendary

Activity: 3472

Merit: 10611

i agree that this tests (attacks) on bitcoin showed that it is susceptible to these kinds of attacks and it leaves it open for more groups to attack it.

1. Established payment systems.
not for now, since bitcoin is not big enough to be any kind of threat to their systems. and still everybody uses their system or at least the big majority of people.

2. People who want to highlight a weakness in btc and force a change (i.e., larger block sizes).
actually i think this is the most probable group of people who are doing the attack right now and will be the motivated group in the future too.

3. The supporters/investors of a competing alt coin.
not likely. because no altcoin is big enough to compete with bitcoin and also nobody would leave bitcoin for an altcoin. also nobody trusts altcoin market as much as they trust bitcoin (both are volatile but altcoin price has much higher risk)

4. Bitcoin shorters.
doesn't seem likely but possible.

5. Bored billionaires.
if they are sadistic yes Cheesy

6. Exchanges. Any volatility increases the income for exchanges.
i don't see how they can profit prom these attacks.

#7. miners
it is possible that miners are doing this to force increasing the fees in order to have more income especially since the block halving is near,

jeffthebaker

legendary

Activity: 1526

Merit: 1034

One possible offender that wasn't mentioned are sidechain operators. A group like Blockstream is more than a likely offender of the current spam attack.

ransomer

newbie

Activity: 56

Merit: 0

Quote from: tl121 on July 15, 2015, 07:25:48 PM

Quote from: Beliathon on July 15, 2015, 12:24:38 PM

Everyone alive has an incentive to attack the bitcoin network (wealth), and everyone alive also has a much more compelling incentive not to attack the network, because it's much more profitable to direct that same energy towards mining for the network.

Directing one's energy toward mining will not be profitable unless one has a low cost source of electricity or one has early access to much more efficient mining hardware than the bulk of miners.

How about setting a limit to the miningsize of each operation. For example by geographical location.

Something has to be done to avoid economies of scale here.... it is in noones interest to see a mining monopoly develop.

newb4now

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 500

Quote from: Amph on July 14, 2015, 09:20:21 AM

Quote from: fatguyyyyy on July 13, 2015, 07:32:08 PM

govt, nsa, etc. .. big banks. Almost anyone 'big' has an incentive to take down bitcoin

they will end up losing more money than anything else, it's better for them to welcome bitcoin and embrace its technology, if they can regualte it and taxe the shit out of it like some GOV are already doing, it would be a win win for everyone, maybe not for die hard bitcoin fan who want freedom...

Die hard bitcoin fans who define freedom as financial privacy and perfect fungible will find other solutions such as Monero.

Of course Monero allows compliance with all government rules as well by optionally sharing your view key.

Best of both worlds.

Bitcoin is resilient and will survive long term. There will be other leaders that emerge to serve the niches bitcoin cannot.

Smart early BTC adopters will hedge accordingly

tl121

sr. member

Activity: 278

Merit: 254

Quote from: Beliathon on July 15, 2015, 12:24:38 PM

Everyone alive has an incentive to attack the bitcoin network (wealth), and everyone alive also has a much more compelling incentive not to attack the network, because it's much more profitable to direct that same energy towards mining for the network.

Directing one's energy toward mining will not be profitable unless one has a low cost source of electricity or one has early access to much more efficient mining hardware than the bulk of miners.

Beliathon

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU

Quote from: monsanto on July 15, 2015, 02:02:27 PM

I see no reason why this would always be the case. For example, how would every established payment system (1) have "a much more compelling incentive" to mine bitcoins?

Sooner or later their choices will be reduced to capitulation or bankruptcy, that's how.

turvarya

hero member

Activity: 714

Merit: 500

Quote from: Beliathon on July 15, 2015, 12:24:38 PM

Quote from: monsanto on July 09, 2015, 02:57:53 PM

There could be many groups with an incentive to continue these attacks

Everyone alive has an incentive to attack the bitcoin network (wealth), and everyone alive also has a much more compelling incentive not to attack the network, because it's much more profitable to direct that same energy towards mining for the network.

It's basic game theory at work.

This attack is easier carried out than building mining equipment that get's you anything from mining.
There are also people who just want Bitcoin destroyed, since it is a thread to them(banks).

monsanto

legendary

Activity: 1241

Merit: 1005

..like bright metal on a sullen ground.

Quote from: Beliathon on July 15, 2015, 12:24:38 PM

Quote from: monsanto on July 09, 2015, 02:57:53 PM

There could be many groups with an incentive to continue these attacks

Everyone alive has an incentive to attack the bitcoin network (wealth), and everyone alive also has a much more compelling incentive not to attack the network, because it's much more profitable to direct that same energy towards mining for the network.

It's basic game theory at work.

I see no reason why this would always be the case. For example, how would every established payment system (1) have "a much more compelling incentive" to mine bitcoins? Maybe they'd have an incentive not to attack because they could be found out and get bad PR, but I don't know why they'd support the network by mining. It would seem they have a lot more to gain from attacks.

Beliathon

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 1000

https://youtu.be/PZm8TTLR2NU

Quote from: monsanto on July 09, 2015, 02:57:53 PM

There could be many groups with an incentive to continue these attacks

Everyone alive has an incentive to attack the bitcoin network (wealth), and everyone alive also has a much more compelling incentive not to attack the network, because it's much more profitable to direct that same energy towards mining for the network.

It's basic game theory at work.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: Meuh6879 on July 13, 2015, 05:40:15 PM

Quote from: botany on July 13, 2015, 11:22:16 AM

Somebody is burning money to cause this attack.

attack ?

We have milliards of SPAM email per day ...
Bitcoin will be no exception.

That's why, Fees algorythm in 0.11 Bitcoin Core can do the job.
But ... noobs ... don't want to pay fees.

They will learn.

There isnt only the Bitcoin Core. And besides, why should we raise fees because someone spams the network? Spam should be charged with fees and they spam by creating huge transactions. Should be easily chargeable. I dont feel well when someone can go and force all bitcoinusers to pay higher fees. I mean will miners build a group in some time and connect in order to force bitcoins to pay higher fees in order to earn more?

Amph

legendary

Activity: 3248

Merit: 1070

Quote from: fatguyyyyy on July 13, 2015, 07:32:08 PM

govt, nsa, etc. .. big banks. Almost anyone 'big' has an incentive to take down bitcoin

they will end up losing more money than anything else, it's better for them to welcome bitcoin and embrace its technology, if they can regualte it and tax the shit out of it like some GOV are already doing, it would be a win win for everyone, maybe not for die hard bitcoin fan who want freedom...

Borisz

sr. member

Activity: 476

Merit: 251

Quote from: johnyj on July 13, 2015, 07:27:13 PM

Increased activity of coin transaction will just make coin less available in circulation, thus raise its value. The more you attack the network, the stronger it grows, it absorbs all the energy that fed into it

I would consider the reduced speed of the network and the increased fees as a negative effect. Its kind of like saying that the frozen bank accounts in Greece have higher value because there is less money in circulation. I don't think this is the way to increase the value of a currency/asset. Not by a attack by any means.

Also the price hasn't sky-rocketed either due to the spam. Its a bit higher yes, but
1. Is the slight increase in price actually due to the spam?
2. Will it last?
3. Is it worth it to have it at the cost of increased fees and longer transaction times?

I would be happier without people spamming the network.

fatguyyyyy

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

Bitcoin Mixer: https://BitLaunder.com

govt, nsa, etc. .. big banks. Almost anyone 'big' has an incentive to take down bitcoin

johnyj

legendary

Activity: 1988

Merit: 1012

Beyond Imagination

Increased activity of coin transaction will just make coin less available in circulation, thus raise its value. The more you attack the network, the stronger it grows, it absorbs all the energy that fed into it

Meuh6879

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1012

Quote from: botany on July 13, 2015, 11:22:16 AM

Somebody is burning money to cause this attack.

attack ?

We have milliards of SPAM email per day ...
Bitcoin will be no exception.

That's why, Fees algorythm in 0.11 Bitcoin Core can do the job.
But ... noobs ... don't want to pay fees.

They will learn.

SebastianJu

legendary

Activity: 2674

Merit: 1083

Legendary Escrow Service - Tip Jar in Profile

Quote from: AgentofCoin on July 13, 2015, 03:42:23 PM

Quote from: AgentofCoin on July 13, 2015, 11:45:18 AM

Narrowed down to four options:
(1) Chinese Miners, attempting to get the fee/zero limits rasied.
(2) Chinese LTC Pumpers, attempting to get Bitcoin users to transfer to LTC.
(3) OKCoin Exchange, attempting manipulation to prevent their bankruptcy.
(4) All the above working together in some form or another. Wink

Anyone thinking this is a bank or billionaires doing this for shits is on the wrong path.
This was purposefully done, to facilitate some sort of manipulated realized gain.

Quote from: SebastianJu on July 13, 2015, 01:48:49 PM

I think 1 is unlikely because miners already can decide what transactions they want to include. They can even create empty blocks or accept only transactions with a minimum fee of 0.1 Bitcoin, when they want. And since china has the biggest miners, they likely could sit together and work out a plan. Then only accept high fee transactions. All other transactions would wait considerably longer then. At the end the fees most probably would rise.

If miners all raise their fees, without outside influence on the network (the spam attack), then it would be seen as corrupt/bad by the community.
The spam attack gives the miners a reason to raise fee much earlier in advance of block rewards lowering.
Miners fees went up 2000% at minimum during backlog.
What you outlined above is exactly what happened. So why do you think it is unlikely?

In another thread i read that the attack already cost $50k now. The additional fee coming from raising the fees would need a long time to reach that. Especially since only a couple or only a single minercorporation might be behind it.

It would be simpler to simply raise the minimum fee. Since china has the majority of the hashpower it would delay transactions and it would consequently lead to higher fees, without costs. It would look natural.

Quote from: AgentofCoin on July 13, 2015, 03:42:23 PM

Quote from: SebastianJu on July 13, 2015, 01:48:49 PM

I dont see that, litecoin price dropped, shortly later bitcoin too. Doesnt look correlated to me.

Your observation should be viewed earlier in the timeline. The recent attack started July 7, 2015. LTC pump started from there.
Due to network problems, some users decided to "invest" into LTC to diversify their holdings, before the price dropped.
One of the reasons LTC rose was because BTC users did so and did so since old LTC Dev (now at coinbase) stated that LTC has spam protections and faster confirms.
People trading altcoins know what I'm talking about.

If thats true then i will keep an eye on the next spam attack. Roll Eyes

Might be able to make some bucks on litecoin then.

Quote from: AgentofCoin on July 13, 2015, 03:42:23 PM

Quote from: SebastianJu on July 13, 2015, 01:48:49 PM

3? OKCoin is bankrupt? Guess i missed some news. And i dont see how spamming could help. Exchanges surely use high enough Transaction fees.

They are on verge potentially. Fractional reserve trading has cost them greatly.
They also trade LTC, just FYI.

Yes, they had a problem some time ago but the fractional reserve was a solution they suggested. When this reserve isnt enough then they would simply screw traders again.

Though you might be right... exchanges might have really other ways to "make" money.

Topic: Those with an incentive to attack the bitcoin network - page 2. (Read 3613 times)