I added a new checkpoint to repel the potential 51% attack. It is important for all pools and exchanges to use this new code. For now, please grab the source and compile yourself. I will work on the binary release soon. To get the code, grab the 0.6.3 branch: git clone git://github.com/litecoin-project/litecoin.git
cd litecoin
git branch -f 0.6.3 origin/0.6.3
git checkout 0.6.3
cd src
make -f makefile.<your os>
|
|
|
|
|
Her name is Kaley Wu. If you want, go dox her. I'm not an expert at doxxing people.
|
|
|
|
I think her 100% just means that I know her name.
This is a good start. You know her name. You know where she lives. Now we would have a name, gender, and location. Jeez, you can't ask for better info. And you know it. Where does she live? I have no idea. Would you please stop making these claims about me as if they are true? |
|
|
|
The thing is I am not hiding from anyone either. I have been to two SF Bay area Bitcoin Meetups, I am a member of the Sunnyvale group, met several people and Coblee 100% knows who I am. People are stone cold shocked when they meet me, I always get the same reaction....you're not what I was expecting. Here's a hint, I'm not a he LOL. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=51376.msg616639#msg616639Hm... Do you believe everything BitcoinEXpress posts? I think her 100% just means that I know her name. They both have said they've met each other on a couple occasions.
That's just not true. Only she's claimed that I 100% know her ... whatever that means. |
|
|
|
Why don't you just ask/pm Coblee? They both have said they've met each other on a couple occasions. San Fran was it?
If someone was trying to take down something that I worked hard on, I'd be telling everyone who they are. It has struck me as rather odd that Coblee hasn't just given out their information. They seem very familiar with each other when they speak.
I have never said that I've met BitcoinEXpress. She has told me her name and that she lives in the same area, but we've never met in person. For all I know, it could be a total lie. |
|
|
|
Blocking EC2 won't prevent any attack. He can just have a non-EC2 machine talk with his EC2 instances to get the forked chain and have that non-EC2 machine broadcast the longer chain to all pools and miners.
Right, but it would still make it harder, since if he had a genuine botnet he wouldn't need ec2 and if we don't do it we will have to deal with EC2 traffic and the other machines under his control. I think most people don't understand a 51% attack. His fork will be mined in secret. So his EC2 instances and botnets and gpus will not be talking to any machine on the main network during the duration of the attack. Only when he is releasing the longer chain, would one of his machine need to announce the chain to everyone. So during the attack, you will not notice anything like an increase in hashrate. |
|
|
|
|
Blocking EC2 won't prevent any attack. He can just have a non-EC2 machine talk with his EC2 instances to get the forked chain and have that non-EC2 machine broadcast the longer chain to all pools and miners.
|
|
|
|
And lemme guess you wrote your own gpu miner? IIRC those were only for sale.. not free.
With CPU a block a day or something.
Hey the dummy is finally getting a clue. I didn't write it, an engineer I work with did. It wasn't as good as ArtForz who had one first, but it did the trick! @CobleeJust curious, do you think I have the ability and have any chance at success of 51% LTC... ~BCX~ Of course. It's a lot harder than it was when Litecoin first came out. But you just have to DDoS all the pools, which we know you are capable of. Then while people are down, you throw a few hundred EC2 instances and a few hundred GPUs at it to fork a chain. The best defense we have is to solo mine or use p2pool. That way a DDoS won't take all the miners down and it would require more resources to try to outpace the main network. |
|
|
|
So is this possible? And if so what will happen to the ltc block chain?
Nothing much will happen to the LTC blockchain: if it's an attack with really huge hashpower then he can try to fork from an earlier block, but still it has to be a block after a checkpoint and not e.g. the genesis block. However, an attack from an earlier block is probably infeasible, because he'd have to compete with the hashpower that already did that work and then race with the current hashpower, so I suppose that instead he means forking from the current block. So while the attack takes place and he starts building the forked chain, he can deposit LTC to btc-e, trade them for BTC, withdraw the BTC, then broadcast his forked chain so the person he traded with who got the LTC will actually get nothing. Therefore, if everyone just doesn't trade on btc-e while the attack takes place, then there would be no victims of a double-spending attack, and the only thing that the attacker will gain is the 50 LTC block rewards in his forked chain (meaning that he'd earn the same amount of LTC by mining regularly instead of forking). Exactly. But there's no way you can expect people to not trade on the exchanges. And if the exchange uses BCX's litecoins to pay out any withdrawals, those payments will be reverted when BCX's fork is announced. So in the end, some people will lose some coins. The loss of coins would be nothing compared to the Bitcoinica hack/theft/incompetence fiasco. But, it would be interesting to see what kind of effect this has on Litecoin. Would people rally behind it and put more hashpower into it to prevent further attacks? Or would people lose trust in the coin because another attack can happen any time in the future? I don't think it will kill Litecoin, but it will likely put a hurting on the price for some time, which may not be a bad thing in the long run. |
|
|
|
So is this possible? And if so what will happen to the ltc block chain?
Sure it's possible, it's only between 400-600 gpus required. And thats not impossible to get ahold of. What will happen? People won't trust it anymore so they will sell and abandon it. Thats what will happen. Yes, it's possible. Not even bitcoin is immune from 51% attacks. Though with bitcoin it's much harder, but then someone with an ASIC can attack it if they wanted to. Satoshi did say that people would not try to 51% bitcoin, because if they had that much hash power, they would earn more money by mining it normally than by attacking it. This is true with Litecoin right now. If BCX used his hashpower to mine Litecoin, he would make more money than to try to do a double spend with a 51% attack. If BCX is just going to fork the chain for 24 hours. Then what would happen is that all transactions within that 24 hours period would be reverted. And those transactions will then be replayed on the new forked chain if they are still applicable. If they cannot be replayed, then a double spend will happen. (Reminds me when I did a "git rebase" on the litecoin code just a few days ago and ran into a ton of merge conflicts.) Normally, only the attacker would be able to double spend his coins. Since no one else is aware of the attack and would be able to muck with his transactions to double spend them. But the double spend by the attacker will have ripple effects that would potentially invalidate a lot of other transactions. |
|
|
|
I probably shouldn't waste my time responding to a 53-post noob, raper of bitcoin, and socketpuppet of CoinHunter.
You just did. In any case, I have plausible deniability for any of those crazy claims. I wouldn't tattoo my name on your "socketpuppet" (LOL) list on your forehead just yet. Oh, and coblee resorting to personal attacks?!?!?!?!? RUN TO THE HILLS!!!!!!11!!Sorry, but which of my statement is a personal attack? sockpuppet of CoinHunter? raper of bitcoin? 53-post noob? Honestly, your posts really sound like CoinHunter. If you are not a sockpuppet, you must be a long lost twin. |
|
|
|
@Coblee
This isn't personal at all but your fellow miners over at BTC-E are taking on some serious Solidcoin type attitudes.
The challenge has a been made and apparently support over there was with them on it, in making a challenge that I couldn't 51% LTC.
Nothing like that to give me reason to resurrect some serious GPU hashpower, build up some EC2's (keep in mind even Coinhunter verfied I had over 700 EC2's running at the SC2 launch), connect up with some botnetter friends and bring some BTC out of USB deep freeze for fees... LOL....
This is fair warning to all.
Challenge accepted.
~BCX~
Seriously? Most of the guys chatting on BTC-E have been in Cryto like a week, tops. They are kids mouthing off asking questions like, "Can I get BFL ASIC to mine LTC?" or other such nonsense. Although it once was a good place to talk about the market, it's recently been inundated with a bunch of amateurs whining about how they can't get rich off of .002 BTC. I understand you're angry but there are a lot of us in LTC that aren't the whinny bitches from the BTC-E chatroom who are working hard at LTC and trying to make something valuable. Don't let a buch of jerks push you over the edge, because really the same kids who are pissing you off, don't have anything to lose by the destruction of LTC. You 51% it, they'll lose their $1 shrug their shoulders and go outside to play in the backyard. I think if you have that much GPU power it would be a more effective to add to the network, blow the difficulty through the roof and kick all the kids out. That way you have the best of both worlds- you screw the noobs from the chatroom by making it impossible for them to mine on their Asus EEE PC's, you support a real project that people really do care about (you say it's not personal at Coblee, but then why destroy something he, and many others, have worked so hard on?) and you can then mine a crapload of coins, dump them on the market, crash the price and walk away with a little treasure chest of BTC. It's really the best of all worlds, you'll screw the difficulty, crash the price, f*ck the noobs, prove that you have access to the power, and you don't have to destroy all our hard work all in one go. Please? +1 BCX, those "fellow miners" on BTC-e are probably SC cultists trying to rile you up. I'm surprised you let them get to you. If you are really going to attack Litecoin because of that, then I will lose all respect for you. You did help me fend off some attacks when Litecoin launched. IIRC, you told me that you thought Litecoin was a fair currency and you didn't want to see it destroyed by those SC scumbags. Has that changed? Why would you try to destroy something you helped protect early on? But whatever. Do what you feel like you must do. If you didn't do it, someone else might come along and try it. At least you gave us fair warning. |
|
|
|
What does coblee have to say....
My premines are 290 days old. Just kidding! I would rather BCX not attack Litecoin. Some troll on the BTC-e chat does not represent all of Litecoin. It's silly to attack the coin based on that. I think BCX is just saying this to get a reaction out of people. And she got what she wanted.  it proves that the coin is insecure? How so? I probably shouldn't waste my time responding to a 53-post noob, raper of bitcoin, and socketpuppet of CoinHunter. |
|
|
|
What does coblee have to say....
My premines are 290 days old. Just kidding! I would rather BCX not attack Litecoin. Some troll on the BTC-e chat does not represent all of Litecoin. It's silly to attack the coin based on that. I think BCX is just saying this to get a reaction out of people. And she got what she wanted. |
|
|
|
|
Sorry for the delay. Payments have been sent at an exchange rate of 0.00518578.
|
|
|
|
|
I received the interes from Pirate. I will pay out interest shortly. The payout amount is already on ltcppt.com.
|
|
|
|
|
A fix has been checked in. Testing right now and we will release another binary soon.
|
|
|
|
Would it be acceptable to ask Ckolivas to do some updates in this thread and/or give donators a sneak preview at early versions. I know this was not part of the deal but it would be a nice bonus.
Is this bounty for a Litecoin GPU miner only or a CPU+GPU miner? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
