Bitcoin Forum
February 17, 2019, 11:32:34 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 [1080] 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 ... 1147 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool  (Read 4345974 times)
ohmygod21
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 07, 2016, 03:29:47 PM
 #21581

Good job sir Cheesy . lets go slush pool
1550446354
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550446354

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550446354
Reply with quote  #2

1550446354
Report to moderator
Your Bitcoin transactions
The Ultimate Bitcoin mixer
made truly anonymous.
with an advanced technology.
Mix coins
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1550446354
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550446354

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550446354
Reply with quote  #2

1550446354
Report to moderator
1550446354
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550446354

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550446354
Reply with quote  #2

1550446354
Report to moderator
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2730
Merit: 1103


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
February 07, 2016, 09:53:48 PM
 #21582

Well, the correct action would be to deduct the rewards paid to a miner who was withholding, and distribute them to the miners who were not paid what they should have been ...

It doesn't matter if it was accidental or not, the miner caused it and received payments that they should not have, and should have gone to the other miners.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
krisgt30
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 456
Merit: 301


View Profile WWW
February 07, 2016, 10:17:16 PM
 #21583

Come on, does anyone really believe it was a "random" miner?

www.bcmonster.com Multi pool, pools for BTC, BCA, LCC, KMD, HUSH and ZEN -Donate:1QGZQBhXMo2jVc45wLEsp2bn5agF8SZSuY
bittalc1
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 12:07:50 AM
 #21584

That message is just full of shit. Yea right miner was makeing problems.
Prelude
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1568
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 08, 2016, 02:53:43 AM
 #21585

This reeks of bullshit.
biggbox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2016, 03:16:34 AM
 #21586

he posted this

Dear miners,
we would like to inform you that we have detected and resolved an unintentional block withholding attack.

The issue has been discovered a week ago and we have immediately taken an action by contacting the particular miner. The cause turned out to be a bug in a custom mining firmware, which has been promptly fixed by the miner. We have no indication that there was any bad intention. The fixed firmware solved two blocks since then so we can consider this issue as resolved.

A recent time period of worse luck can be at least partly attributed to this incident.

Block withholding attack is a well-known weakness of the whole pool mining principle and no public pool is immune against it.

As a by-product of the bad luck investigation, we have implemented a new method how to mathematically prove that the pool does not cheat on miners. This feature will be released after the public interface has been tweaked. The release is planned towards the end of next week.


The correct thing to do is to simply inform the public:

(1) What is the make and model of the miner?
(2) What is the version of the custom firmware?
(3) How to detect such "rogue" miners?

Why did the pool operator not release such public service announcement?

1Cr9iLWm2dSGH8259VQd2wDzpkR63jGVjW
bitsolutions
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 261
Merit: 256



View Profile
February 08, 2016, 03:16:49 AM
 #21587

Since nobody's posted it yet this is the announcement page of the block-withholding.

https://mining.bitcoin.cz/news/recent-low-luck-information/

Mining Software Developer.
kano
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2730
Merit: 1103


Linux since 1997 RedHat 4


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 05:42:02 AM
 #21588

Well, the correct action would be to deduct the rewards paid to a miner who was withholding, and distribute them to the miners who were not paid what they should have been ...

It doesn't matter if it was accidental or not, the miner caused it and received payments that they should not have, and should have gone to the other miners.
The miners here should also be aware that for a pool to detect, with marginal certainly, that a miner is withholding, the miner would have had to mine more than the equivalent of 10 blocks and failed to find any blocks.

i.e. the miner would have been paid over 250BTC, while withholding, probably a lot more, that needs to be returned to the pool and distributed to the other miners.

I suggest you bring this up with the pool operator, since he was underpaying everyone by giving BTC to someone who was block withholding and he should be taking it back from them and returning it to the rest of the miners.

Also he should provide the bitcoin community with the details of what the miner was and the modifications made, to help stop it happening anywhere else ... unless he doesn't care?

--

I've sent support@bitcoin.cz an email saying they need to deal with this properly and a link to this post.

Pool: https://kano.is Here on Bitcointalk: Forum BTC: 1KanoPb8cKYqNrswjaA8cRDk4FAS9eDMLU
FreeNode IRC: irc.freenode.net channel #kano.is Majority developer of the ckpool code
Help keep Bitcoin secure by mining on pools with full block verification on all blocks - and NO empty blocks!
d57heinz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1398
Merit: 1008



View Profile WWW
February 08, 2016, 09:38:24 AM
 #21589

Well, the correct action would be to deduct the rewards paid to a miner who was withholding, and distribute them to the miners who were not paid what they should have been ...

It doesn't matter if it was accidental or not, the miner caused it and received payments that they should not have, and should have gone to the other miners.
The miners here should also be aware that for a pool to detect, with marginal certainly, that a miner is withholding, the miner would have had to mine more than the equivalent of 10 blocks and failed to find any blocks.

i.e. the miner would have been paid over 250BTC, while withholding, probably a lot more, that needs to be returned to the pool and distributed to the other miners.

I suggest you bring this up with the pool operator, since he was underpaying everyone by giving BTC to someone who was block withholding and he should be taking it back from them and returning it to the rest of the miners.

Also he should provide the bitcoin community with the details of what the miner was and the modifications made, to help stop it happening anywhere else ... unless he doesn't care?

--

I've sent support@bitcoin.cz an email saying they need to deal with this properly and a link to this post.

AS i have aswell.. on their facebook page since that is the only place they check for support related shit.. I know crazy right!?? anyway we will see whats up since we were on slush about this since back at least as far as november 2015 from what ive seen posted on fb.  Looking forward to see how this is handled!

Best Regards
d57heinz

As in nature, all is ebb and tide, all is wave motion, so it seems that in all branches of industry, alternating currents - electric wave motion - will have the sway. ~Nikola Tesla~
welshy82
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 01:19:01 PM
 #21590

Well, the correct action would be to deduct the rewards paid to a miner who was withholding, and distribute them to the miners who were not paid what they should have been ...

It doesn't matter if it was accidental or not, the miner caused it and received payments that they should not have, and should have gone to the other miners.
The miners here should also be aware that for a pool to detect, with marginal certainly, that a miner is withholding, the miner would have had to mine more than the equivalent of 10 blocks and failed to find any blocks.

i.e. the miner would have been paid over 250BTC, while withholding, probably a lot more, that needs to be returned to the pool and distributed to the other miners.

I suggest you bring this up with the pool operator, since he was underpaying everyone by giving BTC to someone who was block withholding and he should be taking it back from them and returning it to the rest of the miners.

Also he should provide the bitcoin community with the details of what the miner was and the modifications made, to help stop it happening anywhere else ... unless he doesn't care?

--

I've sent support@bitcoin.cz an email saying they need to deal with this properly and a link to this post.

lets hope he does pay us some sort of compo lol or hes gonna lose a lot oif unhappy miners
btiAndy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 150
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 01:35:15 PM
 #21591

Good to see Slush is trying to come clean, but of course the damage is done and I think it will take much for him to rebuild trust; agree there needs to be more disclosure on who this miner was and what/how the block withholding attack was accomplished.
ohmygod21
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 224
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 05:23:54 PM
 #21592

just wasted 4 Ph with incredible bad luck , 2 blocks > 23 h

3.80 btc loss =) hihaaaaa
hoosier_13
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62
Merit: 10


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 06:38:33 PM
 #21593

Slush is not coming clean.  Far from it.  This issue was known about for weeks and the answer was always bad luck.  They knew there was an issue and did not do the right thing and inform their loyal miners that they could be subject to lose a lot of revenue.

I lost many BTC from this debacle and they have refused any compensation.

Bitrated user: TICH13.
d57heinz
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1398
Merit: 1008



View Profile WWW
February 08, 2016, 07:41:42 PM
 #21594

Slush is not coming clean.  Far from it.  This issue was known about for weeks and the answer was always bad luck.  They knew there was an issue and did not do the right thing and inform their loyal miners that they could be subject to lose a lot of revenue.                                                                                                             MONTHS

I lost many BTC from this debacle and they have refused any compensation.

Wink

Best Regards
d57heinz

As in nature, all is ebb and tide, all is wave motion, so it seems that in all branches of industry, alternating currents - electric wave motion - will have the sway. ~Nikola Tesla~
krisgt30
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 456
Merit: 301


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2016, 08:01:16 PM
 #21595

I mean I have only been mining since the end of December, and right away I knew something was up. I thought to myself, how can 40ph find only one block a day when at the time you had 4ph pools average 1.2 blocks a day. After about 3 weeks on slush pool I noticed this and pulled out and haven't looked back. I am frankly amazed people are still mining on this pool.

www.bcmonster.com Multi pool, pools for BTC, BCA, LCC, KMD, HUSH and ZEN -Donate:1QGZQBhXMo2jVc45wLEsp2bn5agF8SZSuY
btiAndy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 150
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 08:19:33 PM
 #21596

Yeah in hindsight now and thinking about this more clearly something really stinks about this explanation from Slush. He is really not coming clean at all here.

For months we have been watching this cycle and have made repeated attempts to communicate this pattern to him for explanation. Nothing. Now he is basically saying that this particular miner was "accidentally" withholding blocks and that the problem has been fixed...and in fact he knows it has been fixed as that same miner has since the repair cracked two blocks... just not right and not near enough.

Slush should have banned that miner immediately (there must be a way to do this) and made an attempt to recover lost funds to return to those of us who stuck with him for so long. I have been gone from Slush for a few weeks now (actually stopped mining all together as there is no suitable outlet for a small scale miner like me anymore), Slush has definitely soured me on BTC mining as a result though.

Really rotten.
notabeliever
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 690
Merit: 500


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2016, 08:48:48 PM
 #21597

not happy

Pool url: pool.burstcoin.de:8080           
Reward Assignment address: BURST-GHTV-7ZP3-DY4B-FPBFA
jonnybravo0311
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1344
Merit: 1015


Mine at Jonny's Pool


View Profile WWW
February 08, 2016, 08:58:04 PM
 #21598

Yeah in hindsight now and thinking about this more clearly something really stinks about this explanation from Slush. He is really not coming clean at all here.

For months we have been watching this cycle and have made repeated attempts to communicate this pattern to him for explanation. Nothing. Now he is basically saying that this particular miner was "accidentally" withholding blocks and that the problem has been fixed...and in fact he knows it has been fixed as that same miner has since the repair cracked two blocks... just not right and not near enough.

Slush should have banned that miner immediately (there must be a way to do this) and made an attempt to recover lost funds to return to those of us who stuck with him for so long. I have been gone from Slush for a few weeks now (actually stopped mining all together as there is no suitable outlet for a small scale miner like me anymore), Slush has definitely soured me on BTC mining as a result though.

Really rotten.
As was explained earlier, you cannot simply ban somebody immediately.  You don't really know someone is performing a block withholding attack until a large number of hashes have been produced without a block solution.  Plenty of pools regularly suffer through long rounds - it is the nature of mining.  It goes to follow, then, that an individual miner also suffers the same.  Kano suggested 10 blocks earlier.  At that point, the chances of it being "luck" are exceptionally minimal.  Unfortunately, 250BTC have been lost to the miner.

Jonny's Pool - Mine with us and help us grow!  Support a pool that supports Bitcoin, not a hardware manufacturer's pockets!  No SPV cheats.  No empty blocks.
btiAndy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 150
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 10:02:06 PM
 #21599

Yeah in hindsight now and thinking about this more clearly something really stinks about this explanation from Slush. He is really not coming clean at all here.

For months we have been watching this cycle and have made repeated attempts to communicate this pattern to him for explanation. Nothing. Now he is basically saying that this particular miner was "accidentally" withholding blocks and that the problem has been fixed...and in fact he knows it has been fixed as that same miner has since the repair cracked two blocks... just not right and not near enough.

Slush should have banned that miner immediately (there must be a way to do this) and made an attempt to recover lost funds to return to those of us who stuck with him for so long. I have been gone from Slush for a few weeks now (actually stopped mining all together as there is no suitable outlet for a small scale miner like me anymore), Slush has definitely soured me on BTC mining as a result though.

Really rotten.
As was explained earlier, you cannot simply ban somebody immediately.  You don't really know someone is performing a block withholding attack until a large number of hashes have been produced without a block solution.  Plenty of pools regularly suffer through long rounds - it is the nature of mining.  It goes to follow, then, that an individual miner also suffers the same.  Kano suggested 10 blocks earlier.  At that point, the chances of it being "luck" are exceptionally minimal.  Unfortunately, 250BTC have been lost to the miner.

OK Fair enough, thank you for the explanation. I am not sure on the time frame though required for analysis with regard to Kano's explanation.I am sure I am sounding too simplistic and like a "Noob" but my question still stands, ..how long should it take to expose a withholding attack under these circumstances? At Slush this has been going on for at least 3 months in my practical opinion...we saw it repeatedly that when Slush dipped down to ca. 33 PH  the blocks started hitting, the minute we returned to 40PH+ all of a sudden performance went south. In simple terms, it seemed that when one big miner left the pool things would return to "normal", when he returned it went to hell.   just from a standpoint of analyzing a pattern of events should Slush not have been able to pick up on this pattern and figured out where the problem was?

Still curious...
btiAndy
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 150
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 08, 2016, 10:19:59 PM
 #21600

And one last thing, I must say I really enjoy reading your posts Jonny and I have learned a lot over the past few months from your posts...I just want to clarify my statement in my previous post regarding banning the offending miner; I did not mean ban the miner in advance...I think the bad part here is that Slush has stated he contacted this miner after discovering the issue and the solution was simply to "fix" the "unintentional" problem and let this miner continue mining without penalty...no matter if the act was intentional or non-intentional I think those of us who were affected by this problem should have been respected a bit more.

Of course I am speaking from a "blue-sky" customer service standpoint and nothing more, I am sure that legally Slush owes his miners no real duty of service and is not obligated  in any way to compensate miners for wasted time and hash on his pool...it is gambling in the end and we should all know that. I am just saying that for the common good this offending miner who has been supposedly identified by Slush as the cause of the withholding attack should have been removed from the mining pool as consideration to the other miners still there.
Pages: « 1 ... 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 [1080] 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 ... 1147 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
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!