Pages:
Author

Topic: What will happen if someone did control more than 51% of the hashrate? - page 2. (Read 1193 times)

legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
What are "re-orgs"?
I have been told that a 51% attack is very dangerous, what does it mean then?
I thought that double spend also was possible with 51% of the bitcoins.

Let's say that we have the following blocks:

A1 -> B1 -> C1 -> D1

but then someone with >50% of the hashing power creates this:

A2 -> B2 -> C2 -> D2

and the rest of the network agrees that the second set of blocks is both *valid* and *superior* (in terms of POW) than the first set.

So now A1..D1 are *discarded* and replaced with A2..D2 (what came before A1 and A2 is identical and therefore not of concern in terms of any change).

What this could mean is that txs that were valid (with 3 confirmations) in A1..D1 are now no longer valid after the re-org.

This is why you are recommended to wait for confirmations (the more value you are risking the more confirmations you should wait).
member
Activity: 80
Merit: 10
When one single person has 51% of the bitcoins, then it would be possible for that person to create transactions that are invalid. However I think no one will ever own 51% of the bitcoins, unless a very rich guy turns all his money into bitcoin.

Again - *no* you can't create invalid txs or invalid blocks (what have you guys been reading to give you this idea?).

The issue is with potential re-orgs and not with validation.

What are "re-orgs"?
I have been told that a 51% attack is very dangerous, what does it mean then?
I thought that double spend also was possible with 51% of the bitcoins.
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
When one single person has 51% of the bitcoins, then it would be possible for that person to create transactions that are invalid. However I think no one will ever own 51% of the bitcoins, unless a very rich guy turns all his money into bitcoin.

Again - *no* you can't create invalid txs or invalid blocks (what have you guys been reading to give you this idea?).

The issue is with potential re-orgs and not with validation.

The rules that apply to the blockchain is in accordance with the software that you are running and not to do with the POW determination of the longest chain (that applies *after* validation).
member
Activity: 80
Merit: 10
When one single person has 51% of the bitcoins, then it would be possible for that person to create transactions that are invalid. However I think no one will ever own 51% of the bitcoins, unless a very rich guy turns all his money into bitcoin.
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
he would create his own fork, and validate transaction or invalidate transaction of other, the legit chain would get invalid block also

Again - you can't create invalid blocks and they somehow become legit due to >50% of hashing power (that's not how Bitcoin works).

The rules about what is valid/standard is built into the software itself (so you need to change your software to change those rules).

(unfortunately ad-sig posters don't care about facts as they just want to post and get paid - so you constantly get nonsense posts being made on this forum)
legendary
Activity: 3248
Merit: 1070
he would create his own fork, and validate transaction or invalidate transaction of other, the legit chain would get invalid block also
legendary
Activity: 1358
Merit: 1003
Designer - Developer
As the title says, what will happen if someone did control more than 51% of the hashrate?

I've read about the possibility for double spending, but would it even be practical since it would be entirely based on chance, not hashrates?

This happened once already with Btfury. They at one time had >%51 of the hash power. I believe what they did is split it up to a few nodes.
a 51% attack isn't in anyones best interest that uses BTC. so It's nteresting to see what will happen in the future if bitmain or bitfury get > 51%
legendary
Activity: 1890
Merit: 1086
Ian Knowles - CIYAM Lead Developer
Illegitimate blocks doesn't make sense (i.e. just because someone has the hashing majority doesn't mean that they can change consensus rules for others and in particular I am talking about a potential hard-fork).

The main concern would just be transactions being confirmed and then later becoming unconfirmed and replaced by others transactions through a re-org (i.e. done on purpose in order to "double spend").

It should also be pointed out that hashers could simply switch pools (as has occurred before) if they were concerned that the pool that they are using is getting "too powerful".
legendary
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1030
give me your cryptos
If a single entity had control of more than 50% of the total h hashrate, they would be able to outvote the rest of the community. It's that simple. This entity would have the bitcoin network around his finger.

Some things like:

Preferential transactions
Illegitimate blocks
Blah blah blah end of the world etc.
sr. member
Activity: 294
Merit: 250
As the title says, what will happen if someone did control more than 51% of the hashrate?

I've read about the possibility for double spending, but would it even be practical since it would be entirely based on chance, not hashrates?
Pages:
Jump to: