Bitcoin Network is under sybil attack

[chek2fire]

because with one good vps server you can accept more connections than a home server.

[watashi-kokoto]

Yes, tell us something about your salary you get from BlockstR3am/PWC/AXA/TPTB.

Tell us more about those amazing clients, great deals and bosses, and the objectives you have.

you're my favourite shill

[chek2fire]

I really like to know and someone from Classic team to inform us how much will cost us per month to use the after fork Coinbase bitcoin version with this big data centers from nodes to relay every day transactions?

[ATguy]

because with one good vps server you can accept more connections than a home server.

So do you still consider it as a sybil attack by mix of Classic and Core nodes, or you just close the thread to dont continue to spread FUD when you acknowledge yourselves some people are preffering to use good vps server because of better bandwith (and DDoS protection) and not as a intention to attack Bitcoin network ?

[chek2fire]

because with one good vps server you can accept more connections than a home server.

So do you still consider it as a sybil attack by mix of Classic and Core nodes, or you just close the thread to dont continue to spread FUD when you acknowledge yourselves some people are preffering to use good vps server because of better bandwith (and DDoS protection) and not as a intention to attack Bitcoin network ?

Fud is the whining for 6 months about the "death" of bitcoin from a small group of ppl and not this thread. Centralization of bitcoin nodes and attack like this that happen before some hours is a very serious problem and no one can take it so easy.

[Lauda]

So do you still consider it as a sybil attack by mix of Classic and Core nodes, or you just close the thread to dont continue to spread FUD when you acknowledge yourselves some people are preffering to use good vps server because of better bandwith (and DDoS protection) and not as a intention to attack Bitcoin network ?

So you really think that somebody who allegedly created 800 full nodes is doing this to support the network? Where have they been this whole time? What a joke.

Centralization of bitcoin nodes and attack like this that happen before some hours is a very serious problem and no one can take it so easy.

No one besides the people who are behind it.

[franky1]

first time i read about this scenario. Are you sure about this? Can you prove it?

what part?

ok heres an image to help


A= world wide bitcoin network
B= a mining pools network.
C= a pool, note a pool can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a stratum location or asic location
E=a stratum servers, note a stratum can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a pool location or asic location
F=a asic miner, note a asic can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a pool location or stratum location

ok.. now then the pool(a) handles the transaction validation and decides what transactions it needs to put into a block. it then makes a BLOCKHEADER and sends that over the internet to the stratum servers(d). these stratum servers then over the internet send this small blockheader along with the difficulty required to the asics(f)

please note that that the asics do not receive 1mb of data that is 2000 transactions(based on a full block) they receive a blockheader and a difficulty and they transmit back a possible solution.(said it twice incase you glossed over it)

to clarify:
asics, stratums and pools do not send out every hash attempt to the bitcoin network and pools do not send every transaction to the stratum/asics..

so no matter how many transactions a block may have. an asic does not care, because all they handle is a blockheader and subsequent hashs. not full blocks.
no matter if the asic is in china and the pool is in iceland. an asic does not care, because all they handle is blockheader and subsequent hashs. not full blocks.

so many pools have asic farms in china so they can be just an hour delivery away from the asic manufacturers, rather then days oversea's shipping.
but the POOL server can be anywhere in the world. because what a pool handles (true blocks headers and hashes) vs what the asic handles(headers and hashes) are 2 different things.

[chek2fire]

first time i read about this scenario. Are you sure about this? Can you prove it?

what part?

ok heres an image to help


A= world wide bitcoin network
B= a mining pools network.
C= a pool, note a pool can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a stratum location or asic location
E=a stratum servers, note a stratum can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a pool location or asic location
F=a asic miner, note a asic can be anywhere in the world, does not need physical attachment to a pool location or stratum location

ok.. now then the pool(a) handles the transaction validation and decides what transactions it needs to put into a block. it then makes a BLOCKHEADER and sends that over the internet to the stratum servers(d). these stratum servers then over the internet send this small blockheader along with the difficulty required to the asics(f)

please note that that the asics do not receive 1mb of data that is 2000 transactions(based on a full block) they receive a blockheader and a difficulty and they transmit back a possible solution.(said it twice incase you glossed over it)

to clarify:
asics, stratums and pools do not send out every hash attempt to the bitcoin network and pools do not send every transaction to the stratum/asics..

so no matter how many transactions a block may have. an asic does not care, because all they handle is a blockheader and subsequent hashs. not full blocks.
no matter if the asic is in china and the pool is in iceland. an asic does not care, because all they handle is blockheader and subsequent hashs. not full blocks.

so many pools have asic farms in china so they can be just an hour delivery away from the asic manufacturers, rather then days oversea's shipping.
but the POOL server can be anywhere in the world. because what a pool handles (true blocks headers and hashes) vs what the asic handles(headers and hashes) are 2 different things.

ok i can understand what you say. My question is where is the servers of Antpool and other chinese miners if it outside China.

[ATguy]

So you really think that somebody who allegedly created 800 full nodes is doing this to support the network? Where have they been this whole time?

If we assume 150 Core nodes and 650 Classic nodes, then it fits the much higher DDoS risk for Classic nodes, thus the need to run on good DDoS protected vps. Classic is new, so these had to come recently. Such Core nodes maybe just come recently as well to pretend as Core nodes not switching to Classic (which is happening).

Probably both such Core and Classic nodes are run to support network with fully validating nodes, not to attack it (unless you can prove such malicious intend).

PS: I assume the pic representing BlockStream, at least it fits so well

[franky1]

So do you still consider it as a sybil attack by mix of Classic and Core nodes, or you just close the thread to dont continue to spread FUD when you acknowledge yourselves some people are preffering to use good vps server because of better bandwith (and DDoS protection) and not as a intention to attack Bitcoin network ?

bitnodes incentive 2015

needs we say more about sybil attacks based on core design

[franky1]

If we assume 150 Core nodes and 650 Classic nodes, then it fits the much higher DDoS risk for Classic nodes, thus the need to run on good DDoS protected vps. Classic is new, so these had to come recently. Such Core nodes maybe just come recently as well to pretend as Core nodes not switching to Classic (which is happening).

Probably both Core and Classic nodes are run to support network with fully validating nodes, not to attack it (unless you can prove such malicious intend).

PS: I assume the pic representing BlockStream, at least it fits so well

are you also forgetting the other few hundred core nodes(majority) using other VPS (OVH SAS) (Hetzner)
what about BTCC's 100 node campaign

what about the raspberry Pi node campaign more recently?

[ATguy]

are you also forgetting the other few hundred core nodes(majority) using other VPS (OVH SAS) (Hetzner)

Are there even data how many nodes are only home based? I assume home based are mostly running only part of the time during a day, which based on the Core periodic daily fluctuation seems few hundrend, maybe up to one thousand home nodes only.

what about the raspberry Pi node campaign more recently?

Running full node on such obsolete and low spec computer ? Pi has indeed future only with BlockStream, but it is not good Bitcoin future if full nodes must be compatible with such low spec computers as Pi...

[LiteCoinGuy]

So it could be hundreds of different people renting these nodes, and not Amazon trying to attack Bitcoin

Classic nodes went up 1300-1400 in a day. You saying 1300-1400 people brought nodes online all at once? Not saying it's impossible, but pretty unlikely. There is someone now boasting on reddit about owning 800 nodes in the cloud, paid through May.

[chrisvl]

there are no limits no one can prevent someone to run node,peoples try to save money using cheap hosts,

[Lauda]

If we assume 150 Core nodes and 650 Classic nodes, then it fits the much higher DDoS risk for Classic nodes, thus the need to run on good DDoS protected vps. Classic is new, so these had to come recently. Such Core nodes maybe just come recently as well to pretend as Core nodes not switching to Classic (which is happening).

Core nodes are not switching to Classic. This is false, unless you're saying that somebody is managing to fool the chart by replacing a node every time somebody changed. This would have to be timed properly, and would honestly not make sense. Classic supporters (e.g. Armstrong) are actively supporting the Sybil attack. If they really wanted to support the network, they'd at least distribute their nodes among many datacenters.

PS: I assume the pic representing BlockStream, at least it fits so well

It doesn't fit (yet) and hopefully won't. Maybe I should have added the word Classic somewhere for clarification.

[chrisvl]

Lauda are you wrong is not only armstrong classic supporter,Armstrong have money and can pay for differently datacenters,the peoples do everything they can to save money,and choose cheap datacenters if you don't like it please offer money to those peoples to change datacenters if you can't do that don't speak for many datacenters

[Lauda]

Lauda are you wrong is not only armstrong classic supporter,Armstrong have money and can pay for differently datacenters,the peoples do everything they can to save money,and choose cheap datacenters if you don't like it please offer money to those peoples to change datacenters if you can't do that don't speak for many datacenters

No, I'm not. If you want to support the network, then do it right. There are plenty of places where it won't cost you a fortune. This is one of the services that is being used to spread the attack, however it seems to have more locations available now (IIRC). There was at least 1 tweet of Brian asking people to join in. Additionally it is worth keeping in mind that only 1 out of 4 of those nodes is a full node. The rest are pruned nodes.
Did you not see this?

[franky1]

ok i can understand what you say. My question is where is the servers of Antpool and other chinese miners if it outside China.

san fransisco - https://myip.ms/info/whois/104.20.54.190/k/55850274/website/antpool.com

anywhere in the world

[chrisvl]

Lauda are you wrong is not only armstrong classic supporter,Armstrong have money and can pay for differently datacenters,the peoples do everything they can to save money,and choose cheap datacenters if you don't like it please offer money to those peoples to change datacenters if you can't do that don't speak for many datacenters

No, I'm not. If you want to support the network, then do it right. There are plenty of places where it won't cost you a fortune. This is one of the services that is being used to spread the attack, however it seems to have more locations available now (IIRC). There was at least 1 tweet of Brian asking people to join in. Additionally it is worth keeping in mind that only 1 out of 4 of those nodes is a full node. The rest are pruned nodes.
Did you not see this?

It is obvious your love to Bitcoin Classic

[exstasie]

Here an nice article that does some analysis in regards to this problem: A date with Sybil.

Classic nodes went up 1300-1400 in a day. You saying 1300-1400 people brought nodes online all at once? Not saying it's impossible, but pretty unlikely. There is someone now boasting on reddit about owning 800 nodes in the cloud, paid through May.

All their nodes are controller by less than 300 people.

70% of hash power is controlled by 3 Chinese people whith whom Blockstream/Core signs backroom deals.

To be fair, pool admins will lose control of hash power quickly if they go against their miners' interests. Just look at Ghash.io.

Regarding "backroom deals" (), Eric at HaoBTC indicated that Jeff Garzik similarly met with Chinese miners to facilitate support of Classic. After meeting with him they decided against it.

Many Chinese Bitcoiners - not only miners, but also exchanges and wallet services, originally supported Classic for its support of 2MB block size, but after meeting Jeff Garzik in Beijing, many backtracked because they didn't believe that the team behind is capable or there is a roadmap.

The logic of the Blockstream/Core supporters: a concentration at 300 people is a problem - a concentration at 3 people is not.

Please tell us about your solution to mining centralization that has somehow been lost on the entire community.

Oh, and on the subject of mining centralization: https://www.reddit.com/r/bitcoin_devlist/comments/3bsvm9/mining_centralization_pressure_from_nonuniform/