Bitcoin Forum

A summit meant to address the threat of 51% attacks against the bitcoin network has resulted in a renewed industry commitment to protecting the digital currency’s transaction processing network from majority control by any one entity.

Organized by controversial bitcoin mining pool GHash.io and held as scheduled following the most recent CoinSummit London conference, the meeting involved representatives from notable bitcoin companies such as enterprise mining services provider Peernova, mining hardware manufacturers KnCMiner and SpoondliesTech and the Bitcoin Foundation, as well as other key members of the bitcoin community.

According to documents obtained by CoinDesk, all participants agreed that the consolidation of mining power – and the associated threat of 51% attacks – is something that all parties have a vested interest in avoiding. Participants further concluded that short-term remedies are best suited until a permanent fix is discovered and implemented.

Notably, GHash.io, one of the largest mining pool operators in the ecosystem, has agreed to do all it can to limit its share of the total bitcoin network to 39.99%. This includes asking miners to shift hashing power away from their pools when the hash rate reaches that amount.

A policy of this kind will be recommended to all operators within the bitcoin mining ecosystem.

Though the findings stop short of a conclusive solution, GHash CIO Jeffrey Smith said that temporary ways to mitigate the risk of a 51% attack are the right choice at this time, saying:

“None of the existing technical solutions against the 51% attack threat is able to solve the problem in a long-term perspective, taking into account interests of existing mining pools, individual miners and bitcoin community. Thus, bitcoin adherents should focus on temporary acts until the lifetime solution is found.”

The company has taken steps in recent months to assuage community concerns about any role it could have in a 51% attack. In June, the company declared in a statement that it supports decentralization within the mining network and would never participate in fraudulent behavior.

Action committee to commence

Though no lasting solution was found for the 51% threat, the summit did result in a framework that could help the bitcoin industry work toward an eventual solution.

A new committee is expected to be organized by GHash.io and its digital currency exchange arm, CEX.io, that direct funds and coordinate efforts on a permanent means to address the problem. The funds will provide a vehicle for “accelerating and motivating developers to find a technical solution to the 51% threat by accumulating funds and directing them to this process”.

The document reads:

“The committee will drive closer communication and cooperation between developers working on the bitcoin protocol and solving the 51% issue, and businesses, highly interested in expanding the industry and promote bitcoin to a broader audience.”

GHash.io and CEX.io will manage the committee, which will consist of representatitves of pool operators, bitcoin companies and other members of the mining community. According to the document, those who attended the summit in London are expected to continue developing a structure for the committee in the months ahead.

Bolstering network confidence

The threat of a 51% attack – the theoretical power of one entity within the bitcoin network to successfully broadcast fraudulent transactions and disrupt legitimate ones – has long been a source of concern for some members of the bitcoin community.

Some of the fear has been directed at GHash.io itself. This owes to the pool’s outsized hashing power, which some are worried could be used to manipulate transactions in the network. Others who attended the meeting characterized it as an informal effort to open up lines of communication between interests in the space.

BitGo co-founder and CEO Will O’Brien told CoinDesk that one of the outcomes of the meeting is that the community itself needs to play a role in finding a solution. O’Brien told CoinDesk:

“It’s incumbent upon the industry leaders themselves to make changes that build confidence among the broad bitcoin community, investment community, and the press. We cannot and should not rely on one or more trade organizations to set the rules. Bitcoin is decentralized, and we must build solutions that support that original framework of decision-making.”

Peter Todd was less convinced that the meeting had a decidedly positive outcome. He remarked that the gravity of the situation – both in the short-term and in the long-term – may not be fully appreciated by the GHash.io leadership, saying:

“Talking to the community is a great first step. That said I didn’t get the impression that GHash.io really understood the magnitude of the problem. In particular, they seemed much more focused on getting the bitcoin community to trust them, rather than putting themselves in a position where we don’t have too.”

He noted that a particularly damaging impact of the centralization of hashing power is a growing fear among investors about the ramifications of a potentially monopolized network.

Todd told CoinDesk that the issue poses a “serious long-term obstacle to investment”, but pointed to efforts to develop solutions that he said were promising. Only funding and support, he concluded, will determine how quickly and successfully a fix to the 51% vulnerability is created.

Peernova president Emmanuel Abiodun said that, ultimately, the cooperation that began in London will lead to greater transparency in the mining space and a push toward more decentralization. He also said that a new mining pool being developed by Peernova would abide by a similar cap like the one being sought by GHash.io.

He told CoinDesk that it’s a matter of ensuring the transaction network remains healthy, saying:

“The hundreds of millions of dollars being put into bitcoin by VCs are worth peanuts if we do not have the secure infrastructure miners are putting into place today. VCs need to engage more with miners and not make the same mistakes that were made in the video streaming industry in taking infrastructure for granted.”

Industry-wide issue develops

Members of the bitcoin community have been clamoring for a fix to both the risk of a 51% attack and the conglomeration of hashing power around several large operations. By limiting itself to just below 40%, GHash.io is acknowledging the need to address what has been called by many a growing problem for the network’s long-term health.

The summit – and the proposed committee – also demonstrates a willingness to engage among the bitcoin industry’s major players. As well, the presence of bitcoin core developers and companies outside of the mining sector will no doubt enhance the profile of efforts to develop a fix to the 51% attack issue.

GHash.io, as well as other summit attendees, have called on the community as a whole to help realize a solution to the problem. The group has asked for companies to take part in the proposed committee as well as assist in funding research and development that enhances the security of the bitcoin network.

Still, the topic has been much debated in the industry, with some contending that no solution needs to be found to the 51% attack risk.

For more on this issue and its implications for bitcoin

Source "http://www.coindesk.com/ghash-commits-40-hashrate-cap-bitcoin-mining-summit/"

why is more effort not being put into p2pool?  or has it been decided its not an effective solution?

p2pool simply needs more funding of software development to improve it. It is a solution to the problem of variance which drives people to use mining pools. It can be even more of an effective solution.

If Ghash is truly committed to this  idea, I don't understand why there is a problem. Could they not just increase their 'fee' to the point that hashers go to other mining pools? Their share shrinks, but their profits rise - what's the problem?

Kind of confused by the other entities in the story. Who are they?

I'm really puzzled, why they're doing this now. They didn't seem to care before and just kept repeating their promises to not be evil. If they indeed are evil, they could even now just open a second pool and let some of their big players mine there. They can very well be at 60% right now...

This is BS. There is no way to make sure that they will stick to the 40% cap. What if they launch another secret mining pool with some 15-20% of the hash power, while retaining some 30-40% in GHash?

See also the CoinReport article "GHash.io promises not to cross 40% line".
https://coinreport.net/ghash-io-promises-cross-40-line/

How do you all like the centralized mining cartel for your decentralized currency? Christ, JPMorgan Chase & Co is more decentralized than Bitcoin.

I wish I could even begin to imagine your thought process to call ghash a cartel. Because, you know, nobody had a choice to use anything else before they came about, and their fees are so ridiculously high (0%) switching seems to be such an easy option. That would be an interesting ride. Maybe I need drugs or to be wayyyyy too invested in bitcoin first.

so anything extra above 40% they use an unknown Bitcoin Address so u can't tell it's coming from GHash.io?  sm-rt

Yeah, it's pure marketing. Promises, promises, promises :) They really need to show some concrete efforts in tackling the problem. The thing is, I can't really think of a way to prove you don't own a certain share of the network! Is there one?

Yeah the whole CoinSummit London conference wasn't concrete enough. I think all blocks found by ghash should be given to me and I'll send it out to all their users.

The what? ;D Just to go along with your vivid idea: How could this possibly eliminate the threat of a 51% attack on the bitcoin network to begin with?

Dumb question: Why does Ghash have 0% fees in the first place? What's in it for them to be providing a charity mining pool for BTC? (Besides the potential for a double-spend attempt, which I'm inclined to believe they have enough sense to avoid like the plague.)

It brings in miners with their own equipment in large numbers. The extra hashing power helps them solve more blocks and earn more bit coin with their own equipment and attracts even more miners. 

They have 0% fees to attract people to their pool so people will trade GHs on their exchange, and buy GHs from them when they bring it online. (they earn a commission from GHs and BTC trades on their platform and they sell GHs when they receive additional capacity)

Honestly I would trust them with a lot of power, but it's better to keep safe, especially if bitcoin is to get larger.