Topic: [XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency - page 2033. (Read 4670972 times)

what's the current block id?
how'll I understand my bitmonerond is synced?

0. I'm not a git and programming friendly.
1. There're AES and SSE hard coded, without choice.
2. There're 3 files with a bunch of indish code.
3. Tested only on linux x64 (Ubuntu 14.04) gcc 4.8.2, boost 1.55

Ok?

smooth, NoodleDoodle just said on IRC his latest optimizations are 4x faster on Windows. Untested on Linux so far but he'll push the source to the git repo soon.

We'll be at 1 million network hashrate pretty soon.

lazybear are you interested in a bounty to release the source code (maybe cleaned up a bit?) your optimized miner? 

If not, I'll probably play around with the code myself tomorrow and see if I can come up with something, or maybe Noodle Doodle will take an interest.

You think the average person will recognize the very slight increase in noise that would come from a CPU getting a little warm and the fan speed going up? Most of those cases are not designed to evacuate heat and suck in cool air, they're designed to be quiet - even under load.

Let's say, for the purposes of this discussion, that most regular people have 2 CPUs working for them. Maybe they're high end, maybe low end, but let's just look at the number of CPUs at this point. Regular miner has his 2 CPUs, now botnet miner likely has tens or hundreds of thousands. Really good bot herders can even break the 1M bots mark. You can see that even if we consider the number of bots the botner miner has as half of the total - to account for shut down PCs, loss of bots, internet connection issues on the bots, etc.- and even to tip it more in the home user's favor, let's say he has 2 of the latest i7 Extreme Editions, or hell, even high end Xeons. Even if those bots are all rocking low-end Pentiums and Semprons, the botnet miner will kill the average users by a LARGE margin.

As an aside, this is why ASICs are awful: They are EXTREMELY expensive compared to GPUs, locking out the average person, they entail greater risk, as they cannot be resold if their mining usefulness ends before you thought it would, and they are plug and play, so you can hire unskilled labor to keep them running - and you'll need less labor, because they are far more stable.

lazybear are you interested in a bounty to release the source code (maybe cleaned up a bit?) your optimized miner?  

If not, I'll probably play around with the code myself tomorrow and see if I can come up with something, or maybe Noodle Doodle will take an interest.

Come on, think about why that reasoning is faulty for a minute. No, I'm serious. Think about it before you read the rest of this post.




Let's say, for the purposes of this discussion, that most regular people have 2 CPUs working for them. Maybe they're high end, maybe low end, but let's just look at the number of CPUs at this point. Regular miner has his 2 CPUs, now botnet miner likely has tens or hundreds of thousands. Really good bot herders can even break the 1M bots mark. You can see that even if we consider the number of bots the botner miner has as half of the total - to account for shut down PCs, loss of bots, internet connection issues on the bots, etc.- and even to tip it more in the home user's favor, let's say he has 2 of the latest i7 Extreme Editions, or hell, even high end Xeons. Even if those bots are all rocking low-end Pentiums and Semprons, the botnet miner will kill the average users by a LARGE margin.

Now, why won't this happen with GPUs? Well, for starters, botnet mining on GPUs is not advisable. Very few bots will have decent GPUs, even fewer will have high-end ones, and the user will likely notice the fan going at 100% if he's just in the room. So even if you disable it when he's on the system, his chances of noticing something is amiss are too damned high. Okay, but what about rich GPU farmers? Well, GPUs cost a lot. Not per unit, but to maintain. The more of them you have, you start having big problems. Insane, ungodly amounts of heat. Ridiculous power bills. And then you need someone who is very skilled with computers - and mining, too - to maintain the farm, because God knows GPUs that are left overclocked and running at 100% for weeks/months at a time are not stable. In short, GPUs do not scale well. A few are easy to manage, try too many, and it will cost you a fortune.

As an aside, this is why ASICs are awful: They are EXTREMELY expensive compared to GPUs, locking out the average person, they entail greater risk, as they cannot be resold if their mining usefulness ends before you thought it would, and they are plug and play, so you can hire unskilled labor to keep them running - and you'll need less labor, because they are far more stable.

Sorry, very big...

Hypothetically, were I to write a silent miner for a botnet, I would make it use far less CPU when the user is on it. Maybe 25% to 50% of the CPU. This is not obvious to the user, and when the system goes idle, I simply kick the miner into full gear. You might say Windows defaults cause the system to suspend/hibernate when idle, but I can easily change that from my code, and 99% of users would never think anything of it.

Finally, someone who knows their asshole from their elbow when it comes to botnet administration. However, you are wrong about one thing: If I write my miner correctly, the average user will never know it's there.

Hypothetically, were I to write a silent miner for a botnet, I would make it use far less CPU when the user is on it. Maybe 25% to 50% of the CPU. This is not obvious to the user, and when the system goes idle, I simply kick the miner into full gear. You might say Windows defaults cause the system to suspend/hibernate when idle, but I can easily change that from my code, and 99% of users would never think anything of it.

As this author, I know the idea is to keep as many bots as I can for as long as I can. Therefore, I will not abuse my bots by running a miner at 100% on them at any point where I think the user would notice. If someone has a slow computer, they will do a malware scan or just outright reinstall - and if they can't, they will find someone who can. This is why you keep the users happy.

So, correctly implemented mining malware not very easily noticed by most users, therefore, it's easy money.

P.S. About the DDoS thing, most users won't notice the DDoS itself, but the consequences may hit the user right in the face - people being constantly harassed by way of a DDoS have a tendency to start sending notifications of abuse to the ISPs of the bots. If the ISP contacts the user because they keep getting abuse emails, that's something the user would have a hard time ignoring if they tried.

A screen shot of simpleminer if its an optimized version would suffice next to screenshot of the system screen showing the CPU.

If its a complete separate miner a screen shot of that miner including the command used to start it which should show an MRO address.

Failing that, the source code will do

I agree on the implementation part. They'll have to take complex, obfuscated code and try to put it in without breaking anything. They'll likely need someone who's damn good at higher math, if not a cryptographer.

Source code would be good (and useful!). Alternately, I guess, you could have a trusted person test it.

Ok. What are you can accept as evidence? Other words, what you want to see?

Ok. What are you can accept as evidence? Other words, what you want to see?

^^^ again thats not evidence.

You don't know what coins or processor is doing that mining. Not saying its not true just that that's not real evidence.