Bitcoin Forum
September 19, 2020, 03:04:41 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Antbleed: A remote shutdown backdoor in antminers  (Read 7857 times)
jbreher
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2870
Merit: 1503


lose: unfind ... loose: untight


View Profile
April 28, 2017, 10:23:08 PM
 #121

500k a month to keep BU propped up,

You seem to be making a claim that some party is expending "500k a month to keep BU propped up". Care to substantiate this? Who is the party making this expenditure? In what way is this expenditure 'keeping BU propped up'? How do you know this to be the case?

In an interview, Charlie Shrem made the claim that Roger Ver is spending $500,000/mo to "keep BU propped up". No more details than that were given. Charlie Shrem was the owner of BitInstant, which Roger Ver was a large investor of. Roger Ver denies the claim.

So an unsubstantiated rumor. Got it.

Now that Bitcoin Jesus has been recast as Bitcoin Judas, with a huge contingent prepared to cast him through the gates of hell, should we not be suspicious of unsubstantiated rumors?

I see you've edited, so I shall also:

However it is known that Roger Ver is funding >90% of BU development.

No. The vast majority of BU development is pro bono. Roger made a significant donation to the BU Foundation, but most of that cash is sitting dormant.

Anyone with a campaign ad in their signature -- for an organization with which they are not otherwise affiliated -- is automatically deducted credibility points.

I've been convicted of heresy. Convicted by a mere known extortionist. Read my Trust for details.
1600484681
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1600484681

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1600484681
Reply with quote  #2

1600484681
Report to moderator
AWARD-WINNING
CASINO
CRYPTO EXCLUSIVE
CLUBHOUSE
1500+
GAMES
2 MIN
CASH-OUTS
24/7
SUPPORT
100s OF
FREE SPINS
PLAY NOW
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
anonymoustroll420
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 28, 2017, 10:24:57 PM
 #122

So an unsubstantiated rumor. Got it.

Now that Bitcoin Jesus has been recast as Bitcoin Judas, with a huge contingent prepared to cast him through the gates of hell, should we not be suspicious of unsubstantiated rumors?

Well, the claim is being made by someone who was very close to Roger Ver, not some anonymous troll, so there could be some truth to it. Certainly Roger Ver is spending a lot of money on BU, how much is not known.

Please don't stop us from using ASICBoost which we're not using
achow101
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2254
Merit: 3454


bc1qshxkrpe4arppq89fpzm6c0tpdvx5cfkve2c8kl


View Profile WWW
April 28, 2017, 11:15:49 PM
 #123

I'm not sure what x1, x5,x9 and xd is.
Those refer to the services that a node supports.

x1 is NODE_NETWORK, i.e. a full node
x5 is NODE_NETWORK and NODE_BLOOM
x9 is NODE_NETWORK and NODE_WITNESS
xd (aka x13) is NODE_NETWORK, NODE_BLOOM, and NODE_WITNESS

digaran
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 910
Merit: 613

111113DUwES2ZNWSJztA3oBuhzfcdmiaG


View Profile
April 28, 2017, 11:16:44 PM
 #124

Pointing fingers, blaming blockstreamers for implementing backdoor trojan horse segwit, it was all the real distraction from all the real fucked up things happening right under our noses and guess who managed to constantly divert the attentions away from the real menace?
I'm really disappointed in you franky1 I thought you were different but now I see that you were the one distracting everyone with your finger pointing blaming gmaxwell and showing colorful graphs and charts.
I mean this is just too obvious and I'm the idiot to actually counting on your words for a while but now even me with a pea sized brain can see what is going on.

We should strip you naked and shame you all the way to the court, at least share some of that fat bonus for posting and be an absolute enemy of Core with us I could easily be very convincing with only $5 bucks per effective post Smiley Smiley.

Now I don't know who can I trust anymore, people literally caught them bitmainers while raping the community and yet you come here and say no it wasn't them.
By my calculations I have an estimation that antpool alone is earning averagely $450K upto $600K every 24 hours of every 7 days of every week.
Now take the average of $500K daily * 30 of one month = $15,000,000 dollars and 20% of $15M is = $3,000,000 dollars and according to you the ROI for the manufacturers is instant or one month, so they even ROIed 3 times over already before releasing the S9s to the public.

And now people should know that they have made at least $20M in last 6 months out of the thin air which was coming from within another thin air mining and again mining with asicboost double thin airs.

Now I understand where the funds for spam transactions/ forum dos attacks come from, no people unrelated to crypto specifically bitcoin aren't crazy to dos the forum or spam attack the network and waste their hard earned money.

Who could've thought about all of this right?

I didn't even count the double earnings of selling miners to the public and didn't account for other pools owned by antpool and other coins, hell I'm now certain that they have earned double the amount on LTC mining Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy.

HOWEYCOINS   ▮      Excitement and         ⭐  ● TWITTER  ● FACEBOOK   ⭐      
  ▮    guaranteed returns                 ●TELEGRAM                         
  ▮  of the travel industry
    ⭐  ●Ann Thread ●Instagram   ⭐ 
✅    U.S.Sec    ➡️
✅  approved!  ➡️
The One
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 28, 2017, 11:46:26 PM
 #125

500k a month to keep BU propped up,

You seem to be making a claim that some party is expending "500k a month to keep BU propped up". Care to substantiate this? Who is the party making this expenditure? In what way is this expenditure 'keeping BU propped up'? How do you know this to be the case?

In an interview, Charlie Shrem made the claim that Roger Ver is spending $500,000/mo to "keep BU propped up". No more details than that were given. Charlie Shrem was the owner of BitInstant, which Roger Ver was a large investor of. Roger Ver denies the claim.

However it is known that Roger Ver is funding >90% of BU development. It's likely he also has other expenses too. How much all these expenses total up to is difficult to figure out.

Is this the same C Shrem that was find guilty and went to prison?


..C..
.....................
........What is C?.........
..............
...........ICO            Dec 1st – Dec 30th............
       ............Open            Dec 1st- Dec 30th............
...................ANN thread      Bounty....................

The One
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 28, 2017, 11:49:33 PM
 #126

I'm not sure what x1, x5,x9 and xd is.
Those refer to the services that a node supports.

x1 is NODE_NETWORK, i.e. a full node
x5 is NODE_NETWORK and NODE_BLOOM
x9 is NODE_NETWORK and NODE_WITNESS
xd (aka x13) is NODE_NETWORK, NODE_BLOOM, and NODE_WITNESS

Thanks, so how does all this work?

I can see the xd detail looking at the wallet peers. Does it need to be activated or is it automatic?

..C..
.....................
........What is C?.........
..............
...........ICO            Dec 1st – Dec 30th............
       ............Open            Dec 1st- Dec 30th............
...................ANN thread      Bounty....................

The One
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 28, 2017, 11:55:41 PM
 #127

Pointing fingers, blaming blockstreamers for implementing backdoor trojan horse segwit, it was all the real distraction from all the real fucked up things happening right under our noses and guess who managed to constantly divert the attentions away from the real menace?
I'm really disappointed in you franky1 I thought you were different but now I see that you were the one distracting everyone with your finger pointing blaming gmaxwell and showing colorful graphs and charts.
I mean this is just too obvious and I'm the idiot to actually counting on your words for a while but now even me with a pea sized brain can see what is going on.

We should strip you naked and shame you all the way to the court, at least share some of that fat bonus for posting and be an absolute enemy of Core with us I could easily be very convincing with only $5 bucks per effective post Smiley Smiley.

Now I don't know who can I trust anymore, people literally caught them bitmainers while raping the community and yet you come here and say no it wasn't them.
By my calculations I have an estimation that antpool alone is earning averagely $450K upto $600K every 24 hours of every 7 days of every week.
Now take the average of $500K daily * 30 of one month = $15,000,000 dollars and 20% of $15M is = $3,000,000 dollars and according to you the ROI for the manufacturers is instant or one month, so they even ROIed 3 times over already before releasing the S9s to the public.

And now people should know that they have made at least $20M in last 6 months out of the thin air which was coming from within another thin air mining and again mining with asicboost double thin airs.

Now I understand where the funds for spam transactions/ forum dos attacks come from, no people unrelated to crypto specifically bitcoin aren't crazy to dos the forum or spam attack the network and waste their hard earned money.

Who could've thought about all of this right?

I didn't even count the double earnings of selling miners to the public and didn't account for other pools owned by antpool and other coins, hell I'm now certain that they have earned double the amount on LTC mining Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy.

Trust no one, but yourself.

Do your own research and read the technical whitepapers.

Ask yourself what is Bitcoin suppose to be. Payment service or gold 2.0?

Look at the fees and ask yourself why it is so high.

Understand basic economics, supply and demand; scarcity would do for now.

Ask yourself what agenda does the developers/miners have.

The truth will come to you.

..C..
.....................
........What is C?.........
..............
...........ICO            Dec 1st – Dec 30th............
       ............Open            Dec 1st- Dec 30th............
...................ANN thread      Bounty....................

achow101
Staff
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2254
Merit: 3454


bc1qshxkrpe4arppq89fpzm6c0tpdvx5cfkve2c8kl


View Profile WWW
April 29, 2017, 12:06:10 AM
 #128

Is this the same C Shrem that was find guilty and went to prison?
Yes. IIRC he was released a few months ago.

Thanks, so how does all this work?

I can see the xd detail looking at the wallet peers. Does it need to be activated or is it automatic?
It depends on the software that you are running. Different software will support different services. Additionally if you have pruning enabled you will be disabling NODE_NETWORK for your node. If you run Bitcoin Core 0.13.1+, your node will be xd. Earlier versions should be x5 and even older ones will be x1.

The One
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 924
Merit: 1000



View Profile
April 29, 2017, 12:32:59 AM
 #129

Is this the same C Shrem that was find guilty and went to prison?
Yes. IIRC he was released a few months ago.

Thanks, so how does all this work?

I can see the xd detail looking at the wallet peers. Does it need to be activated or is it automatic?
It depends on the software that you are running. Different software will support different services. Additionally if you have pruning enabled you will be disabling NODE_NETWORK for your node. If you run Bitcoin Core 0.13.1+, your node will be xd. Earlier versions should be x5 and even older ones will be x1.

Just worked that out a minute ago lol thanks.

..C..
.....................
........What is C?.........
..............
...........ICO            Dec 1st – Dec 30th............
       ............Open            Dec 1st- Dec 30th............
...................ANN thread      Bounty....................

arklan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1008



View Profile
April 29, 2017, 04:41:05 PM
 #130

Is this the same C Shrem that was find guilty and went to prison?
Yes. IIRC he was released a few months ago.

well, that's good to hear. if i recall the charges were really really crappy.

i don't post much, but this space for rent.
Vorth
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 29, 2017, 06:32:49 PM
 #131

I'm reading that they could also do a remote reflash of the firmware and potentially brick the hardware.
franky1
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2884
Merit: 1751



View Profile
April 29, 2017, 07:31:21 PM
 #132

wow just wow, you just went full retard franky1.

1. DNS seeds can RPC call the nodes EG trigger some buggy code in implementations - we all know thats possible

2. i wanted to see how many people would reply to protect the blockstreamers access to all nodes, and see if them same people are the same people screaming blue murder about anything not core having similar access to things that are not core. such as asics or other implementations. as an experiment on who factually knows whats possible and who is speculating about worse case scenarios.

i find it funny when people create drama about one thing, but are not equally as critical about the other

ever ask yourself why there are no 0.8 or below nodes on the network
and how easy it could be to start making other implementations not have access.
EG anything below 0.13.1 (70014) can find themselves 'lost'

#define REQUIRE_VERSION 70001
 if (clientVersion && clientVersion < REQUIRE_VERSION) return false;

simply change to

#define REQUIRE_VERSION 70014
 if (clientVersion && clientVersion < REQUIRE_VERSION) return false;

and anything not segwit just wouldnt get a list of nodes from a DNS

and most of the segwit users wont want to manually white list old nodes to offer up a nodes list the other way.
hence why even the segwit documentations says

https://bitcoincore.org/en/2016/10/27/segwit-upgrade-guide/#not-upgrading-1
Quote
The easiest way to prevent this problem is to upgrade to Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 or another full node release that is compatible with the segwit soft fork. If you still don’t wish to upgrade, it is possible to use a newer Bitcoin Core release as a filter for older Bitcoin Core releases.

Filtering by an upgraded node

In this configuration, you set your current Bitcoin Core node (which we’ll call the “older node”) to connect exclusively to a node running Bitcoin Core 0.13.1 or later (which we’ll call the “newer node”). The newer node is connected to the Bitcoin P2P network as usual.
For the older node, first wait for the newer node to finish syncing the blockchain and then restart the older node with the following command line parameter (this may also be placed in the Bitcoin Core configuration file):


yep if you dont want to upgrade. you have to still download a segwit node just to whitelist yourself.

which makes me laugh about the whole "everything is fine segwit is backward compatible and no need to upgrade" promises of segwit going soft

i hope this wakes you up to the TIER network of gmaxwells (upstream filter) and (luke JRs bridge node) word twisting of said tier network of control
where blockstream becomes top of the foodchain..

I DO NOT TRADE OR ACT AS ESCROW ON THIS FORUM EVER.
Please do your own research & respect what is written here as both opinion & information gleaned from experience. many people replying with insults but no on-topic content substance, automatically are 'facepalmed' and yawned at
arklan
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1008



View Profile
April 29, 2017, 07:54:55 PM
 #133

I'm reading that they could also do a remote reflash of the firmware and potentially brick the hardware.

that was correct in theory, but they've now patched the firmware, so it's a non-issue.

i don't post much, but this space for rent.
-ck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3234
Merit: 1353


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
April 29, 2017, 09:52:21 PM
 #134

I'm reading that they could also do a remote reflash of the firmware and potentially brick the hardware.

that was correct in theory, but they've now patched the firmware, so it's a non-issue.
...for those who have updated their firmware.

Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
kingcolex
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2310
Merit: 1249



View Profile
April 30, 2017, 11:49:21 AM
 #135

I'm reading that they could also do a remote reflash of the firmware and potentially brick the hardware.

that was correct in theory, but they've now patched the firmware, so it's a non-issue.
...for those who have updated their firmware.
Which we all know doesn't happen often, most users set it and forget it.
anonymoustroll420
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 196
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 30, 2017, 12:48:47 PM
Last edit: April 30, 2017, 01:00:55 PM by anonymoustroll420
 #136

1. DNS seeds can RPC call the nodes EG trigger some buggy code in implementations - we all know thats possible

No? Open a terminal and type "host dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org"

you get an output like this:

Code:
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 200.8.154.156
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 124.170.80.250
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 66.187.187.94
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 188.81.38.4
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 18.85.35.180
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 192.241.135.239
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 92.232.205.21
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 202.7.239.164
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 101.167.34.215
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 97.92.247.128
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 68.6.231.19
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 54.94.207.125
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 23.243.158.222
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 62.76.26.214
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 189.34.57.96
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 111.164.172.20
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 71.81.75.127
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 178.113.182.244
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 85.74.245.220
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 79.148.67.94
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 67.207.80.65
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 96.23.239.29
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 90.3.155.239
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 85.228.58.134
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 46.4.75.10
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 185.104.11.148
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has address 80.114.11.217
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:4137:9e76:34:211e:fde7:79d8
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:5ef5:79fd:30a9:f23:416e:e935
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2a01:e35:2e54:52c0:5859:d7cb:5cae:2ad5
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:4137:9e76:10eb:3b18:b61e:38bd
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:4137:9e76:3e:18f5:b5ad:115d
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:9d38:953c:20bf:28b2:afe7:8a94
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:9d38:6ab8:1460:2878:ae4e:5e7
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:9d38:953c:10b3:3382:4fa9:4aaa
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2a02:2c8:1:253:4d1:229d:b4c0:b4a5
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:4137:9e76:65:2785:bc48:6331
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:4137:9e76:407:361a:ae98:1c3b
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2600:6c55:7200:14b:cf4:811c:7cb3:f7a7
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:4137:9e76:c03:13fa:a971:d5e4
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:5ef5:79fb:206f:2bed:bb3c:20a5
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:5ef5:79fb:3822:1edd:a80b:bc9f
dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org has IPv6 address 2001:0:9d38:6abd:3438:37c:4dfd:7d4

Those are node IP's. Thats how DNS seeding works, it simply does a DNS lookup. There is no attack surface here.


and how easy it could be to start making other implementations not have access.
EG anything below 0.13.1 (70014) can find themselves 'lost'

That code you provided deals with adding new nodes to the DNS seed. Old and broken nodes are not added to the DNS seed, but old nodes can of course still query the DNS seed for IP's and connect. Even if they couldn't, you could simply run "host dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org" and add the IP's yourself.

By the way, you're full of shit when you say there are only 3 DNS seeds:

Code:
       vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoin.sipa.be", "seed.bitcoin.sipa.be", true)); // Pieter Wuille, only supports x1, x5, x9, and xd
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bluematt.me", "dnsseed.bluematt.me", true)); // Matt Corallo, only supports x9
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("dashjr.org", "dnsseed.bitcoin.dashjr.org")); // Luke Dashjr
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoinstats.com", "seed.bitcoinstats.com", true)); // Christian Decker, supports x1 - xf
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch", "seed.bitcoin.jonasschnelli.ch", true)); // Jonas Schnelli, only supports x1, x5, x9, and xd
        vSeeds.push_back(CDNSSeedData("petertodd.org", "seed.btc.petertodd.org", true)); // Peter Todd, only supports x1, x5, x9, and xd


By the way, I find it hilarious that the only BU-only DNS seed seed.btcc.com is broken right now, much like everything BU related.

yep if you dont want to upgrade. you have to still download a segwit node just to whitelist yourself.

No you just need to use one as a bridge, can be any node, use mine if you like Wink

Please don't stop us from using ASICBoost which we're not using
-ck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3234
Merit: 1353


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
April 30, 2017, 01:15:46 PM
 #137

I'm reading that they could also do a remote reflash of the firmware and potentially brick the hardware.

that was correct in theory, but they've now patched the firmware, so it's a non-issue.
...for those who have updated their firmware.
Which we all know doesn't happen often, most users set it and forget it.
Which was the point of my post... likely the bulk of them out there are still vulnerable.

Additionally I happen to know that certain functionality only existed on the first S9 firmware and many users are reluctant to change from it.

Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
-ck
leopard2
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1371
Merit: 1011



View Profile
April 30, 2017, 06:33:09 PM
Merited by mindrust (2)
 #138

I'm reading that they could also do a remote reflash of the firmware and potentially brick the hardware.

that was correct in theory, but they've now patched the firmware, so it's a non-issue.
...for those who have updated their firmware.

Their evil plan is now spoiled but they had an evil plan, that's what counts.

If someone fires a gun at me and misses, would I listen to a shill who says "Why you worried? Nothing happened."  Cheesy

Truth is the new hatespeech.
homeidea11111
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 20
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2018, 11:27:36 PM
 #139

So if I understood it correctly, bitmain has a remote kill-switch (effectively, since they can brick the machines with the firmware change) on 70% of hashrate? fanastic. What are we supposed to do now, other than change the PoW algo immediately? Core Devs should be having a meeting with non-Bitmain miners right now proposing a roadmap to change the algo and leave Bitmain isolated. I don't think even the BU camp is stupid enough to keep supporting Jihan and his rigged miners anymore.

Anything but open source mining machines should be totally banned from the network. Ideally we should go back to 1cpu=1miner with a new PoW, but how do we guarantee that we will not end up like this again? at least we'll set a precedent I guess.

Anyway, I hope Core Devs are already on this like I said before. We can't go no longer than a week sitting under explosives.

That is really worrying. I guess people should now consider  this on top of the standard 51% attack possibility
WinMar
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 75
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 30, 2018, 01:03:46 PM
 #140

The evil plan seems to be thwarted for now as the website that the miners are supposed to connect to seems to be offline.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!