51% attack pool against ETC

1356

Comments

  • wirelessnet2wirelessnet2 Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    fucking damnit. This is the last thing we want posted on the "wall" of ethereum and just cryptocurrency in general. Now there are news articles on it. Holy shit guys we just helped crypto survive and gain trust! Plus -234 Points for Ethereum!
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    @oslak I rarely visit here nowadays, being someone in his early twenties, lots of things to juggle especially when you've got university final year, and businesses on the side along with a part time job. Used to visit here often because I was very enthusiastic about thee tech, but then realized some people on this forum would use it politically to push their agenda and marketing, so I would rather stay quiet and do constructive things than waste time arguing on the forums(at some point I wasted hours a day).

    So, on to the main topic, how does an attack work? We are only able to stall new blocks from being discovered and reverse blocks right? I was wondering if people wanted to troll it bad enough, could they technically reverse the blocks back to pre-DAO existence? Then none of this DAO debacle would have occurred anyways. Of course I am aware this might take an extended period of mining for prolly 2 months or so considering that each block reversal is equivalent to the amount of time taken to mine that block regardless of the hashrate we possess? That said, as we reverse-mine, do we get any form of payment for that in ETC per block? Or will our only incentive be that the money that we've mined goes missing, while sold transactions dating back to that date is returned to us?

    From what I can see, there should be mining incentive to do a 51% attack on ETC if
    1) You have had a lot of ETc pre-DAO and have either invested in DAO and/or sold the ETc during the peak price.

    2) We reverse mine to the point of Pre-DAO and recoup our ETc that have been sold. There we will have ETc again.

    3) Since our ETc was sold to BTC and BTC doesn't have a rollback, we retain our BTC and yet get our ETC back preDAO again and including ALL ETC sold up till this point for BTC

    Correct me if I'm wrong as I honestly see a very large incentive for a collusion of 51% attack on the ETC network. Sell of your ETC now conduct a 51% attack and then sell it again. This time without the funds sent to the DAO addressees since we've re-written history.

    Hopefully some more knowledgeable people like @dlehenky @work can chime in on this.
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @syaoran99 I'm no blockchain guru, like @work, but intuitively I think it's impossible to roll back the ETC fork prior to the HF at block 1920000. If I'm correct, then obviously going back to pre-DAO can't happen. Essentially, there's only one blockchain up to the recent HF. A 51% attack on the minor ETC fork will not give you control of the main fork, which would be required to go back pre-HF to pre-DAO. I think there are even more dramatic reasons why a rollback of that magnitude would do colossal damage to Ethereum; any trust in the network would be obliterated.
  • newmznewmz AustraliaMember Posts: 299 ✭✭✭
    If you are seriously discussing a 51% attack for personal gain, then you are as bad as the DAO attackers. You may not like ETC but why do you care really? They will be gone soon so just let them have their little game.
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    @dlehenky

    Um...If i'm not wrong, isn't the ETC chain the original un-forked chain? Which means there technically doesn't exist a fork on the ETC chain and it should be reversible beyond block 192000 as on that chain itself nothing happened at block 192000 besides hashrate drastically dropping.

    What i'm asking isn't to reverse a block on the current ETH chain, but only to reverse the blocks on the ETC chain to back to pre-DAO to alter the history in which case on the ETC chain, theDAO never happend and there was no such thing as theDAO.

    on the ETH chain however DAO existed and technically their "genesis" block is block 192000.

    To how it could damage the Ethereum network, well, it would serve as a very interesting mining incentive to rollback, over such a long period in turn getting back a LOT of ETC. (which is why in the first place a 51% attack is so bad because some people would lose money if they weren't in on the attack) which was impossible on the ETH chain, but is now possible on the ETC chain. It would also serve as a VERY interesting lesson and research outcome to show the vulnerability of ETC at the same time completely segregating the ETC chain from the ETH chain, Where in ETC apps starting from the pre-DAO block, all dapps were not developed. That way all dapps on the ETH chain would technically be safe and different from ETC. At the very least we could also save ETH's value while forcing ETC to run their own futures rather than piggy back on ours.

    Lastly, it would also show the vulnerability of Bitcoin as a 51% attack of such a magnitude would re-iterate the vulneerability of a PoW systeem in the long run which would definitely encourage the adoption of ETH in the long run because of its roadmap towards a more resilient and secure PoS+PoW algorithm.
  • syaoran99syaoran99 Member Posts: 204
    newmz said:

    If you are seriously discussing a 51% attack for personal gain, then you are as bad as the DAO attackers. You may not like ETC but why do you care really? They will be gone soon so just let them have their little game.

    I do not see the harm in theorizing it at any point though. Because unless I have the help of a few other pools, It will be unlikely that I could successfully carry out the attack on my own of 500Gh network capacity over the long run as we've seen the peak we had was 900Gh. Maybe short term but not long enough to reverse blocks to before theDAO.

    Anyhow, theDAO attackers and ETC supporters are one and the same because they're attacking the ETH network by supporting its existence out of pure personal greed. So I think that giving them back the same treatment would be considered fair play. Besides if they are to hold true to their immutability, they would not fork it to save the network because of a simple 51% attack rollback. It's Code, It's Law, the network was meant to be able to do that as long as 51% agreed to it. They can not fork lest they break the sole excuse for the coin's existence.
  • workwork Member Posts: 2,084 ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 2016
    @syaoran99 it's essentially impossible to revert the chain that far. I could do the math on how much hash for how long, but my 5 second mental estimate means there aren't enough GPUs in the world to revert the ETC chain past the fork let alone another 20days.

    @newmz wrong. 51%ing the ETC chain would be an attack on those that were complicit with TheDarkDAO.

    I have the start of a plan for a pool, btw. I'll see how my weekend plays out but I think I might have some news on this soon. To tease... think full-custom stratum implementation supporting all existing mining software (heavily tested), written fully in high performance C code, with the best highcharts visuals and stats on the front-end that you've ever seen. Share validation system has been tested for 800GH/s at a 300mil share target (so at 1bil share target, it can handle pretty much the entire network hashrate).

    For those that don't want to (or can't) support with hashrate, how about a donation fund that will be distributed to miners for time spent mining in the ETC chain? I wonder if we could get enough together to fund a full day of hashing without any loss to the miners...
  • BigTabbyCatBigTabbyCat Member Posts: 1
    @work

    I created an account just to respond to your post.



    Will definitely donate at least one BTC to that pool!
  • dlehenkydlehenky Member Posts: 2,249 ✭✭✭✭
    @syaoran99 Well, of course, I got it wrong. Mentally I think of ETH as *the* blockchain, although it's the one that forked, not ETC, as you said. I have no interest in providing hash to rollback the ETC blockchain for personal gain; none whatsoever.

    @work Definitely curious about your pool design! I'd certainly kick in my meager hash to help, and perhaps donate, too. :)
  • greenusergreenuser 50.8862°N 4.5537°WMember Posts: 439 ✭✭
    Hi Guys, hows the attack on Classic going? Will anyone be able to mine at this new pool or is it invites only?
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    @syaoran99 good to see your post. Welcome back. :)
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    @dlehenky I think @ocminer is the owner of supernova.cc
  • greenusergreenuser 50.8862°N 4.5537°WMember Posts: 439 ✭✭
    oslak said:

    @dlehenky I think @ocminer is the owner of supernova.cc

    Cool, I mine Groestlcoin at https://grs.suprnova.cc
    @ocminer do you host Brexitcoin mining too?
  • ocminerocminer Member Posts: 37
    Nope, no Brexitcoin, but ETC ;)
  • blckeaglsblckeagls Member Posts: 5
    51% Attack Pool: http://51pool.org/

    CURRENTLY COLLECTING ETH UNTIL HASHRATE EXCEEDS ETC'S


    will perform attack on etc in the following increments:
    First: 1 hour
    Second: 4 hours
    Third: 8 hours
    Fours: 24hours
    Fifth: Until Dead
  • greenusergreenuser 50.8862°N 4.5537°WMember Posts: 439 ✭✭
    edited July 2016
    blckeagls said:

    51% Attack Pool: http://51pool.org/

    CURRENTLY COLLECTING ETH UNTIL HASHRATE EXCEEDS ETC'S


    will perform attack on etc in the following increments:
    First: 1 hour
    Second: 4 hours
    Third: 8 hours
    Fours: 24hours
    Fifth: Until Dead

    @blckeagls can anyone mine here? Or invites only?
    I see nowhere on the pool that states your intention.
    What if a newcomer just wants to mine and not have their hashpower used to fight a war of the coins. It would be misleading not to state your intention on the pool web page.
  • wirelessnet2wirelessnet2 Member Posts: 385 ✭✭✭
    does that pool have DDoS protection? Doubt it... Its gonna get a lot of hate lol it happened with BTC and 51% attacks
  • seanz123seanz123 Member Posts: 36
  • newmznewmz AustraliaMember Posts: 299 ✭✭✭
    how much hash power does the pool need to be able to mount the attack?
  • nathannnathann Member Posts: 72
    newmz said:

    how much hash power does the pool need to be able to mount the attack?

    ~220-230 GH/s
  • oslakoslak Member Posts: 191
    newmz said:

    how much hash power does the pool need to be able to mount the attack?

    The hashrate that was pooled into this pool will add to the present hashrate. That means at 453.7 GH/s present hashrate you need at least 460Gh/s more to surmount the 51% probe.
  • EastwindEastwind Member Posts: 107
    oslak said:

    newmz said:

    how much hash power does the pool need to be able to mount the attack?

    The hashrate that was pooled into this pool will add to the present hashrate. That means at 453.7 GH/s present hashrate you need at least 460Gh/s more to surmount the 51% probe.
    Miners are chasing the profit. If you point 230GH to the pool, other 230GH/s will leave the pool as it becomes less profitable to miner if there are 460GH/s there. So network hash rate will be kept at 460GH. So with 230+, you can 51% attack.
  • rocket790rocket790 Member Posts: 5
    I had to join so I could post my say,

    I think this is extremely malicious, if this is successful it will have huge ramifications for all crypto especially ethereum, media "Ethereum miners attack decentralized Classic" etc etc..

    Anyone who participates in this is as bad if not worse than the DAO hacker himself, if this was to be done it should have been done the moment ethereum forked, but as of now Ethereum Classic has turned into its own decentralized platform, it is absolutely wrong to try kill something that is supported by the people that have a vision of a totally decentralized Ethereum.

    Not to mention the new investors to crypto world and the people that want to support Ethereum Classic, the market cap of ethereum classic is 140 million and growing, to just simply wipe that into dust is far worse than the DAO hacker himself.

    Shame on you guys for joining this pool,
  • QuellwasserQuellwasser Member Posts: 43
    I think most people don't realise that ETC is an attack on ETH. Almost dead, but came back to live - thanks to Polo.
  • user769user769 Member Posts: 5

    I think most people don't realise that ETC is an attack on ETH. Almost dead, but came back to live - thanks to Polo.

    Most people are stupid.

    These kind of actions just hurt the image of ETH and give extra credibility and free marketing to ETC.

    Even the people that were indecisive until now and were still on the ETH side will step towards ETC because of stupid stunts like this. Too bad...

    I am one of them. Hashes are going towards ETC from my side since today.
  • smokybearsmokybear Member Posts: 1


    "Today i will turn on my 120GH for the ETC chain to protect ETC"
  • MrYukonCMrYukonC Member Posts: 627 ✭✭✭
    Chandler Guo can go stuff it. He's a total hypocrite.

    And in reality, he's just trying to manipulate the markets. He probably bought some ETC. LOL

    Good luck, he'll need it.
  • MrYukonCMrYukonC Member Posts: 627 ✭✭✭
    Also, his 120 GH/s is not being reflected in the overall ETC network hashrate (as of right now and since that post, which was hours ago at this point).

    As I said, he's probably just talking trash and trying to pump his ETC holdings.
  • dukuudukuu Member Posts: 3
    Who exactly is innocent among ETC buyers? Most are speculators who just care about profits. Not to mention creating a market for stolen property. I mean sure, the hacker found a glitch and abused the code, let's reward him, screw the investors who actually risked capital to give functionality to Ethereum as a platfom.

    All of this is just too toxic and sometimes wrong. I am not necessarily against ETC, but hearing all the trash talk about bailouts (no it wasn't a bailout, it was fixing a glitch and returning lost property), or ETC about being immuteable (no it's not, if ETH was forked, ETC can be too) makes me sick.

    Oh and Chandler's statments reeks of manipulation. So when ETC holders were everyone in the network who owned ETH before the split, 51% was ok, but now, when speculators (let's not kid ourselves, most are speculators) are in for the ride, it's not ok anymore?
  • user769user769 Member Posts: 5
    edited July 2016
    dukuu said:


    All of this is just too toxic and sometimes wrong. I am not necessarily against ETC, but hearing all the trash talk about bailouts (no it wasn't a bailout, it was fixing a glitch and returning lost property), or ETC about being immuteable (no it's not, if ETH was forked, ETC can be too) makes me sick.

    It was a bug in the DAO

    NOT ETH

    There was no glitch in ETH
Sign In or Register to comment.