 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1]
|
Since nothing really was done about the previous attacks (only a band-aid), the attackers now simply use two algos to fork the chain for their own use and are gaining millions:  Both algos, scrypt and lyra2re can be rented easily for a few bucks at nicehash, they simply send one block scrypt, after that a block lyra2re and so on and all with manipulated timestamps thus lowering diff to lowest possible mining several blocks per minute like this Well, it's perhaps my Dutch nature thinking this, but this hack ain't for the money. The value of the coin will sink quickly the longer this takes and the damage is huge, so the attacker will have millions of worthless coins soon and is going nowhere. So most of the Verge fan's are right saying that this probably is a act of hate in my opinion. Second, there are people around on the net who can make your life like hell. You don't want to be on their fan list and i guess Justin unfortunately is. @ocminer, it seems like you are a gifted person. Can you help Justin out to get this fixed the proper way then please and offer him some solutions in private perhaps? I wish Justen and the Verge team the best of luck next hours/days. Stop being so ignorant. Verge is being targeted because it has shitty coding and an incompetent developer. This hack is the result of the terrible job he did 'patching' the previous hack. Hold on here. If i leave my bike without lock, it doesn't give someone the right to steal it. The same applies here. This is an act of hate, destroying the coin and it is irreversible. The only rules in decentralized crypto is the code, so the "attacker" is mining within rules, your analogy couldn't be more misplaced. |
|
|
|
Thank you ocminer for clarification and learning experience and thank you VergeDev Justin (?) for Action and also the learning experience and the allmost "only" mineable GPU coin since days/ weeks. I even found x17 algo last week finally.  You both should go along. Don't get ugly. Drink a Beer and laugh about later maybe.  BTW: One newbie question concerning the following.
2. It's possible to blacklist certain addresses within the blockchain. So if you know on which addresses hacked funds reside, you can simply "blacklist" them directly in the codebase of the coin.
For example you know that the attacker has used address "123abc123acb123abc" as the root for his hacked funds. You can now - at anytime - update your wallet code and just say
"orphan all transactions with the root address "123abc123acb123abc". So even if the hacker moves the funds NOW or in one year, it won't happen as you've blacklisted the originating address.
This was done previously also, not on myriad but on another coin - I can also find that commit for you.
This frightens me. So it would be possible for Governments or other entities to erase any BTC or Altcoin? This is really frightening! What do they need for that? Some secret Key for Seed Server or what is needed? The blacklisting would have to be accepted by majority of the miners devaluating the non blacklisting old chain (likely to zero), there is no entity who can decide that, it's miners or one could say the network itself. |
|
|
|
catalogue? only reported what ocminer said... just hope the innocents get out before the whales dump their loads on them
i guess they can't even send their cons to exchange to dump them at this stage LOL exchanges and pools works really well. Do you missed the train Guido and need to buy at dips? there were no issues with any of the exchanges. pools found orphans during the attack. other than that there was no effect on regular users. Yeah no effect lmao, 20m extra XVG out there. Investors didnt pay for that shit No seriously are you trolling? Verge wasn't an ICO so there are no investors, only speculators, this is an important distinction because it means that verge devs aren't legally responsible for what happens to it. |
|
|
|
Not illigal
Expensive bug bounty
illegal * And if there's a bug in the code that allows hackers/thieves the ability to go against the consensus rules of the chain, that would be considered illegal creation of coins as they did not follow the rules laid out in the code. They are neither hackers nor thieves, nor was the creation of coins illegal, in fact it was done with accordance to the consensus rules of the chain, otherwise it would be impossible to do. You can't have decentralized pros without its cons. This is so so so wrong... Can you please link to the line of code which says blocks can be instamined or created in <1 second as per the "consensus rules" Code is all that matters, if it's possible to do it is implied that it's within the rules, this is a non argument. You don't understand blockchains or code Alright, next thing you will say is that 51%'ing bitcoin would be illegal or that it would be hacking, stay ignorant. |
|
|
|
Not illigal
Expensive bug bounty
illegal * And if there's a bug in the code that allows hackers/thieves the ability to go against the consensus rules of the chain, that would be considered illegal creation of coins as they did not follow the rules laid out in the code. They are neither hackers nor thieves, nor was the creation of coins illegal, in fact it was done with accordance to the consensus rules of the chain, otherwise it would be impossible to do. You can't have decentralized pros without its cons. This is so so so wrong... Can you please link to the line of code which says blocks can be instamined or created in <1 second as per the "consensus rules" Code is all that matters, if it's possible to do it is implied that it's within the rules, this is a non argument. |
|
|
|
Not illigal
Expensive bug bounty
illegal * And if there's a bug in the code that allows hackers/thieves the ability to go against the consensus rules of the chain, that would be considered illegal creation of coins as they did not follow the rules laid out in the code. They are neither hackers nor thieves, nor was the creation of coins illegal, in fact it was done with accordance to the consensus rules of the chain, otherwise it would be impossible to do. You can't have decentralized pros without its cons. |
|
|
|
|
