Bitcoin Forum
November 09, 2024, 02:33:55 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 28.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: why take down mining pools?  (Read 809 times)
dethdeks (OP)
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 206
Merit: 100



View Profile
December 03, 2012, 06:13:29 AM
 #1

besides trying to piss people off why and what people get out of ddos'ing mining pools? like seriously. every mining pool I'm signed up to are down and non accessible.

Donations Accepted
LTC: Lcv7XmxnHJ7BhRjXjzCUBJ4Cfrq43SA5qc
BTC: 16mHGGVgntqtTmrddud8BFgN3XAsBobvVe
gweedo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1498
Merit: 1000


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 06:27:59 AM
 #2

Probably trying to do a 51% attack
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010


View Profile
December 03, 2012, 06:48:01 AM
 #3

Probably trying to do a 51% attack

Or simply bringing difficulty down to be able to mine with a ton of new GPUs once difficulty adjusts down.

If 51% attack were the intent you'ld think it would have been better timed by waiting until difficulty dropped first.   It is easier to do a 51% against a difficulty 30 than a difficulty 44, and a drop was likely already before the DDoS even.


Unichange.me

            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █
            █


mancBTC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 03:36:40 PM
 #4

A 51% attack is about the dumbest thing someone could do. If you have over 51% of hashing power surely it would benefit you more to mine BTC as opposed to trying to double spend whatever BTC you currently have.

Of course a national govt could want to do this but there are easier ways to disrupt BTC (for a national govt).
KWH
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960
Merit: 1052

In Collateral I Trust.


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 03:38:59 PM
 #5

My guess is to bring the difficulty down. Some people.........

When the subject of buying BTC with Paypal comes up, I often remember this: 

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

Albert Einstein
DeathAndTaxes
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079


Gerald Davis


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 03:43:35 PM
 #6

A 51% attack is about the dumbest thing someone could do. If you have over 51% of hashing power surely it would benefit you more to mine BTC as opposed to trying to double spend whatever BTC you currently have.

Of course a national govt could want to do this but there are easier ways to disrupt BTC (for a national govt).

It is important to break the "51% attack" into two groups.  The economic attack (engaging in an attack with the intent to profit from the double spends or possibly by shorting BTC) and the destructive attack (engaging in a 51% attack with the end goal of destroying or significantly marginalizing bitcoin).

There is little value in an economic 51% attack.  The cost of such an attack far outweighs the amount of commerce which could be double spent.  Add to it the difficulty in having funds/goods delivered without detection and it really is just a monster under the bed ("don't let the 51% man get you, he will make your coins disapear".

The destructive attack however if still viable for a major corporation, a cartel of such corporation, or a governmental entity.  While those entities do have other resources (legislation, internet filtering, FUD campaigns, etc) the 51% attack can be done covertly.  Major governments engage in covert operations all the time.  Billions upon billions spent on programs and projects that the tiniest fraction of the citizenry even know exists.

That being said do I think a govt is going to 51% attack bitcoin?  No.  It likely will be futile.  The destruction on Napster only caused the community to develop even hard to attack resources and protocols.  In hindsight it would have been far better for the media industry to work with napster and develop a way to monetize it. 

Graet
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 980
Merit: 1001



View Profile WWW
December 04, 2012, 04:05:29 PM
 #7

good explanation D&T though I think he was referring to the recent attack on Litecoin pools - much less resources needed to attack Wink

| Ozcoin Pooled Mining Pty Ltd https://ozcoin.net Double Geometric Reward System https://lc.ozcoin.net for Litecoin mining DGM| https://crowncloud.net VPS and Dedicated Servers for the BTC community
NikeDefense
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 04:21:42 PM
 #8

The argument to bring down difficulty is also a bad one.

One person would need to block a giant number of ppl from nearly every mining pool and even then difficulty would only go down after 2000 blocks so yeah...

My guess is for giggles, some scriptkiddies showing their "power".....

Or a rivaling pool you never know Wink
mancBTC
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21
Merit: 0


View Profile
December 04, 2012, 04:57:28 PM
 #9

Hi mr D&T,

Thanks for that.

Can i ask something, i saw your nme referenced in a thread about starting a BTC business. Something along the lines of knowing "why you should listen to Death and Taxes opinion and knowing his history with bitcoin". Where would i find out more about your involvement, history and participation/impact on BTC?
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!