How To Make Bitcoin Immune From DDOS Attacks and Even A Full Internet Shutdown

[Sage]

The backbone of Bitcoin is the Minors.  Without them we are all dead.  But we are foolishly wasting the single most powerful computer network ever created…

How?

By using that hashing power to solving complex math problems that in the end do nothing but regulate the speed of Bitcoin deployment.

While I see the necessity of proof of work to be rewarded coins, who the hell says that work needs to be directed at cracking crypto puzzles?  It doesn't!

…a much, much better use of that work could be to power a Bitcoin driven darknet mesh network.

On this darknet Bitcoin decentralized exchanges could be built, and all Bitcoin transactions could be piped though the darknet…

The net effect would be the same as it is now.  Difficulty could still be adjusted accordingly, but not to solve a math problem, instead to power the darknet mesh network.

The traffic on the darknet would be directly related to the load demand on Bitcoins.  The hashing power would increase just about the same time the darknet needed it as the price (and user base) of Bitcoins increased.

Such a darknet would make Bitcoin completely immune to DDOS attacks, inepts like Mtgox, and even immune from a shutdown of the internet.

…All because we used our tremendous hashing power far more wisely!

Lets not get complacent.  We'll be in the same boat 2 years from now.  Lets not make the same mistake.  There are some obvious flaws in the infrastructure  surrounding Bitcoin.  (Mtgox, and all central exchanges simply gotta go period!)

Lets fix the problem now.  Strike while the iron is hot.

…A miner driven darknet mesh network is an elegant solution to the problem.  And could be done so easily building on existing open source darknet code.

What would it take to get this implemented?

[Gabi]

Yeah nice, make that software instead of speaking about of it.

[Peleus]

Uhh how exactly are you suggesting information goes from computer A to computer B?

[Sage]

Yeah nice, make that software instead of speaking about of it.

This is a job for a team, and for techies.  A visionary I am, a techie I am not (yet).  If I was, it would certainly be my top priority.

But the conversation has to start somewhere.  Looks like that somewhere is here.

[Sage]

Uhh how exactly are you suggesting information goes from computer A to computer B?

Just like existing darknets do it now...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darknet_%28file_sharing%29

[Gabi]

A visionary I am, a techie I am not (yet).

Yeah, too much visionary, what you said don't really make a lot of sense  Fighting a ddos with hashing power? nonsense

[Sage]

A visionary I am, a techie I am not (yet).

Yeah, too much visionary, what you said don't really make a lot of sense   Fighting a ddos with hashing power? nonsense

Yep, solving it with hashing power would be nonsense.  Perhaps you should re-read the post!  Not hashing power, but a decentralized darknet mesh network (currently such networks are impossible to attack with DDOS)!

[Ekaros]

A visionary I am, a techie I am not (yet).

Yeah, too much visionary, what you said don't really make a lot of sense   Fighting a ddos with hashing power? nonsense

Yep, solving it with hashing power would be nonsense.  Perhaps you should re-read the post!  Not hashing power, but a decentralized darknet mesh network (currently such networks are impossible to attack with DDOS)!

I do count radio jamming as DOS. And with such resources it could be distributed and probably had to...

[Raoul Duke]

One idea that comes to mind is requiring a small proof-of-work problem to be solved each time a transaction is requested (similar to email?).

Similar to: https://bitmessage.org/wiki/Main_Page

[qualalol]

You could be onto something. My explanation is a bit long-winded but it gets to the point eventually...

For some reason the developers don't seem very keen on developing a working system for bidding. IMO it's a "no-brainer" -- block space is a scarce resource, and miners should be able to auction it off to the highest bidders, unencumbered by stupid Apple-like restrictions in the reference wallet software. However, some people seem to have Socialist views regarding transaction fees (probably without even realising it) because they want transactions to be "really cheap and abundant and available to everyone equally"... But at the same time: "of course miners are entitled to profit from their work".

This is why the developers should stop being idiots and write up a protocol already! They are far too confused without one. Their endless claims that the 'reference' software is the protocol is utter BS and intellectual dishonesty. If that were really the case then would never be any bugs! But since there sometimes are bugs, that proves that they are (dishonestly?!) referring to a protocol elsewhere (it's probably just mapped-out in their heads) to determine if/when the reference client has a bug.

Mapping the protocol out (on paper and publishing it!) would probably show some obvious things that need to be done. E.g.: as you alluded to, there appears to be no mechanism for withstanding DDOS attacks on the transaction queue (the memory pool). One idea that comes to mind is requiring a small proof-of-work problem to be solved each time a transaction is requested (similar to email?). This would facilitate development of a bidding system for fees, as it would negate any need for "preventing superficial double-zero-conf-spends" like they attempt to do now. Such a tweak would allow some massive code clean-up to be done, but they've got to want to do it.

It's free / open source software. EVERYONE is a developer. If you want to see something done then do it. Or pay someone to do it. Or STFU if you're too lazy to bother.

[qualalol]

...

It's free / open source software. EVERYONE is a developer. If you want to see something done then do it. Or pay someone to do it. Or STFU if you're too lazy to bother.

That is me doing something. I saw what looks like a problem (or could become problematic), thought of a general direction that could solve that problem, and I communicated the idea on this public forum. If I instead got stuck into writing code,
1) I'd be in way over my head learning C++ on a completely non-trivial project,
2) I'd be inclined to rip out all the spaghetti code, and may end up writing an entirely new client or even a new Coin if it's too different from the existing stuff.
3) It would be highly unlikely to get past all of the Community Consensus Voodoo... And I don't have the energy/drive/willpower/death-wish to build a massive alt-coin community from scratch.

1: Existing projects are the best way to learn. You see how things can be done, and more importantly you learn how things shouldn't be done in the future. (And it's pretty fun.)
2: So you don't have a clue about programming (point 1), yet you are good enough to criticise the code?
3: You don't have to get past any "Community Consensus Voodoo". You can publish the code, and if people think it's good they'll use it, otherwise it'll die off in a corner. (How do you think the bitcoin client first came about? Someone wrote it, published it, people liked it enough to use it.)

And please explain how the following is helpful to the developers:
"stupid Apple-like restrictions in the reference wallet software" (WTF?)
 "developers should stop being idiots" (Yep, they are stupid for having written software and given it away for you to use...)
"but they've got to want to do it." (Are you paying them or something?)

What you are doing is baselessly insulting volunteers and the code they make. If you are better than them then why aren't we using your code? If you aren't better than them then what gives you the right to insult them and their code?

[Sage]

...

It's free / open source software. EVERYONE is a developer. If you want to see something done then do it. Or pay someone to do it. Or STFU if you're too lazy to bother.

That is me doing something. I saw what looks like a problem (or could become problematic), thought of a general direction that could solve that problem, and I communicated the idea on this public forum. If I instead got stuck into writing code,
1) I'd be in way over my head learning C++ on a completely non-trivial project,
2) I'd be inclined to rip out all the spaghetti code, and may end up writing an entirely new client or even a new Coin if it's too different from the existing stuff.
3) It would be highly unlikely to get past all of the Community Consensus Voodoo... And I don't have the energy/drive/willpower/death-wish to build a massive alt-coin community from scratch.

1: Existing projects are the best way to learn. You see how things can be done, and more importantly you learn how things shouldn't be done in the future. (And it's pretty fun.)
2: So you don't have a clue about programming (point 1), yet you are good enough to criticise the code?
3: You don't have to get past any "Community Consensus Voodoo". You can publish the code, and if people think it's good they'll use it, otherwise it'll die off in a corner. (How do you think the bitcoin client first came about? Someone wrote it, published it, people liked it enough to use it.)

And please explain how the following is helpful to the developers:
"stupid Apple-like restrictions in the reference wallet software" (WTF?)
 "developers should stop being idiots" (Yep, they are stupid for having written software and given it away for you to use...)
"but they've got to want to do it." (Are you paying them or something?)

What you are doing is baselessly insulting volunteers and the code they make. If you are better than them then why aren't we using your code? If you aren't better than them then what gives you the right to insult them and their code?

C'mon guys, we gotta work together on this.  Each contributing in the way their strengths and skills are best suited.

The only way it's going to happen is an open-source initiative.

That's gonna take a team... all with different skill sets, and different perspectives.

Criticism I welcome, from those with the skill and expertise to offer it.  And if it's constructive. 

But, ego driven debate is just wasted energy.



 

[Luckybit]

The backbone of Bitcoin is the Minors.  Without them we are all dead.  But we are foolishly wasting the single most powerful computer network ever created…

How?

By using that hashing power to solving complex math problems that in the end do nothing but regulate the speed of Bitcoin deployment.

While I see the necessity of proof of work to be rewarded coins, who the hell says that work needs to be directed at cracking crypto puzzles?  It doesn't!

…a much, much better use of that work could be to power a Bitcoin driven darknet mesh network.

On this darknet Bitcoin decentralized exchanges could be built, and all Bitcoin transactions could be piped though the darknet…

The net effect would be the same as it is now.  Difficulty could still be adjusted accordingly, but not to solve a math problem, instead to power the darknet mesh network.

The traffic on the darknet would be directly related to the load demand on Bitcoins.  The hashing power would increase just about the same time the darknet needed it as the price (and user base) of Bitcoins increased.

Such a darknet would make Bitcoin completely immune to DDOS attacks, inepts like Mtgox, and even immune from a shutdown of the internet.

…All because we used our tremendous hashing power far more wisely!

Lets not get complacent.  We'll be in the same boat 2 years from now.  Lets not make the same mistake.  There are some obvious flaws in the infrastructure  surrounding Bitcoin.  (Mtgox, and all central exchanges simply gotta go period!)

Lets fix the problem now.  Strike while the iron is hot.

…A miner driven darknet mesh network is an elegant solution to the problem.  And could be done so easily building on existing open source darknet code.

What would it take to get this implemented?

Not a bad idea but this would depend on there being a wide distribution of miners while the current trend is toward a miners elite market.

[Xenland]

Decentrizlise your internet and bitcoin can't be shut down..... that means use Cellular, Satellite and a ground line.... if one fails switch to the other, they can shut them all down or all business ceases and people get pissed.

[Groc]

the closest thing to an decentralized internet is  https://freenetproject.org/

[Sukrim]

Yeah nice, make that software instead of speaking about of it.

This is a job for a team, and for techies.  A visionary I am, a techie I am not (yet).  If I was, it would certainly be my top priority.

But the conversation has to start somewhere.  Looks like that somewhere is here.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkGMY63FF3Q