hdbuck
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1002
|
 |
September 02, 2015, 08:12:47 PM |
|
I am in favor of "stress testing" coinwallet.eu back. Does anyone have an ip for their server or node(s)?
That's teh spirit  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
Mickeyb
|
|
September 02, 2015, 08:16:16 PM |
|
Just wondering what peoples thoughts are on this?
The way I read their PR thing is that they are using this attack as a way to promote their business because their customers won't be effected because of Coinwallet.eu fucking shit up for the rest of the unknowing folks.
Who the hell knows why are they doing it, only they know for sure and we are just guessing! Yes, they might be promoting their business, that's a sound assumption. But also it is possible that they are affiliated in some way with the XT success and they are doing it so that XT can successfully for the network. They might be also doing it because they want the best for Bitcoin, to show that we need bigger blocks and that we can't stay on 1MB, if we would have a surge of new users over the night. Go and pick one of the three, they are all possible IMHO! |
|
|
|
|
unamis76
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1009
|
|
September 02, 2015, 08:50:41 PM |
|
Not in favor of dos'ing these guys (although they do deserve it...). The reason is, they might be mad and retaliate and we really should't be giving them much attention...
|
|
|
|
|
|
maokoto
|
|
September 02, 2015, 10:12:27 PM |
|
I agree to not retaliate. They are acting wrong, blocking lots of users (I have two transfers waiting for hours now), but we cannot fall in the same actios or it would be chaos.
|
|
|
|
BayAreaCoins (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3920
Merit: 1242
Owner at AltQuick.com & FreeBitcoins.com
|
|
September 02, 2015, 10:27:15 PM |
|
Not in favor of dos'ing these guys (although they do deserve it...). The reason is, they might be mad and retaliate and we really should't be giving them much attention...
I agree to not retaliate. They are acting wrong, blocking lots of users (I have two transfers waiting for hours now), but we cannot fall in the same actios or it would be chaos.
Eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind I suppose. |
|
|
|
|
poeEDgar
|
|
September 02, 2015, 10:32:46 PM |
|
I wouldn't DOS them on the basis of the stress test, prima facie. But I'd consider it since they are using it to advocate the use of 3rd party web wallet services which are "immune" to such tests....  |
I woulda thunk you were old enough to be confident that technology DOES improve. In fits and starts, but over the long term it definitely gets better. |
|
|
|
bahamapascal
|
|
September 03, 2015, 12:10:23 PM |
|
Seems like the Stress Test hasn't started yet, has it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
turvarya
|
|
September 03, 2015, 12:23:29 PM |
|
Stress testing a product is part of every sound engineering process that wants to improve a product and make it more robust. While very inconvenient when this happens it can only get out stronger. The problem here is that testnet can't simulate every real cases.
No. You and I both know sound engineering isn't the reasoning behind these attacks. They are attacking the network trying to force a sketchy ass fix. Perhaps Coinwallet.eu could use some stress testing on their product to assure their engineering is sound... you know... to help make it more robust.  It's illegal to do a DOS attack on Coinwallet.eu from the UK. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/11/12/uk_bans_denial_of_service_attacks/12 Nov 2006 at 06:25
A law was passed last week that makes it an offence to launch a denial of service attack in the UK, punishable by up to ten years in prison. Why isn't it illegal for them to do a stress test on Bitcoin, because it's a very close to a DOS attack on a website? I don't understand why a legit UK company can get away with this behavior. If it's not illegal in the UK then some new laws against it need passing. Who is going to sue them? The CEO of Bitcoin? lol Besides, they are not a legit UK company. I also don't think, they care, if you DDOS them. |
|
|
|
|
Kyraishi
|
|
September 03, 2015, 12:28:35 PM |
|
I wouldn't DOS them on the basis of the stress test, prima facie. But I'd consider it since they are using it to advocate the use of 3rd party web wallet services which are "immune" to such tests.... Yep, same here. |
|
|
|
ArticMine
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2282
Merit: 1050
Monero Core Team
|
|
September 03, 2015, 04:52:34 PM |
|
No. The current "stress test" attacks on Bitcoin work and can actually be profitable because the fixed 1 MB blocksize limit is a fundamental flaw in Bitcoin. Stress testing the messenger (attacker if you wish) is not going to solve the problem, quite apart from the legal ramifications of such action.
|
|
|
|
notbatman
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2212
Merit: 1038
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:10:22 PM |
|
Why, to reveal a certain vulnerability and make everyone believe that we needed a quick fix immediately. Probably because they need it faster than you and I do and they are putting their money where their mouth is. Either way, bitcoin is an open network so they are free do to whatever they want. Agreed on the last bit, but creating a problem to force a solution is different from a natural-occurring problem with a carefully-planned solution. Btw, when was the attack going to take place? "problem reaction solution" hmmm, let me put on my thinking cap and try to think where have I heard this before??  |
|
|
|
|
|
RGBKey
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:26:05 PM |
|
Online off-chain wallets have never been a good idea. See: inputs.io. You only own the coins if you're the only one with the private keys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
poeEDgar
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:29:00 PM |
|
No. The current "stress test" attacks on Bitcoin work and can actually be profitable because the fixed 1 MB blocksize limit is a fundamental flaw in Bitcoin. Stress testing the messenger (attacker if you wish) is not going to solve the problem, quite apart from the legal ramifications of such action.
Can you give an example of how this attack can be profitable? Are there alternative mechanisms to specifically address this type of spam, rather than simply increasing block size (presumably infinitely, if I recall your position correctly)? |
I woulda thunk you were old enough to be confident that technology DOES improve. In fits and starts, but over the long term it definitely gets better. |
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:30:33 PM |
|
how much are they paying in fees to put on this show?
can they seriously backlog the system 30days as they suggested?
how do miners determine a particular TX is spam for this attack?
|
|
|
|
|
RGBKey
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:32:04 PM |
|
No. The current "stress test" attacks on Bitcoin work and can actually be profitable because the fixed 1 MB blocksize limit is a fundamental flaw in Bitcoin. Stress testing the messenger (attacker if you wish) is not going to solve the problem, quite apart from the legal ramifications of such action.
Can you give an example of how this attack can be profitable? Are there alternative mechanisms to specifically address this type of spam, rather than simply increasing block size (presumably infinitely, if I recall your position correctly)? It can be profitable if they manage to get people to write stories about them, because it could cause people's transactions to take longer to confirm. It's an advertising gig. |
|
|
|
|
|
maokoto
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:32:19 PM |
|
Seems like the stress test has ended now, transactions are going faster than yesterday at least.
|
|
|
|
Patel
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1321
Merit: 1007
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:33:14 PM |
|
Rumor is real test starts Sept. 10
|
|
|
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:36:19 PM |
|
No. The current "stress test" attacks on Bitcoin work and can actually be profitable because the fixed 1 MB blocksize limit is a fundamental flaw in Bitcoin. Stress testing the messenger (attacker if you wish) is not going to solve the problem, quite apart from the legal ramifications of such action.
Can you give an example of how this attack can be profitable? Are there alternative mechanisms to specifically address this type of spam, rather than simply increasing block size (presumably infinitely, if I recall your position correctly)? It can be profitable if they manage to get people to write stories about them, because it could cause people's transactions to take longer to confirm. It's an advertising gig. I really like CoinWallet.eu spaming the network, i think i'll look into there service and use it. LOL!!! these guys offer cash in the mail withdrawals for selling BTC to them without any varification these guys are going to get shut down.  |
|
|
|
|
poeEDgar
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:37:11 PM |
|
how much are they paying in fees to put on this show?
can they seriously backlog the system 30days as they suggested?
how do miners determine a particular TX is spam for this attack?
Perhaps we should develop standards for dust transactions above a certain threshold of outputs. |
I woulda thunk you were old enough to be confident that technology DOES improve. In fits and starts, but over the long term it definitely gets better. |
|
|
adamstgBit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1037
Trusted Bitcoiner
|
|
September 03, 2015, 05:42:41 PM |
|
how much are they paying in fees to put on this show?
can they seriously backlog the system 30days as they suggested?
how do miners determine a particular TX is spam for this attack?
Perhaps we should develop standards for dust transactions above a certain threshold of outputs. make some BIPs about that and have miners vote on it! |
|
|
|
|
