[4+ EH] Slush Pool (slushpool.com); Overt AsicBoost; World First Mining Pool

[eleuthria]

I doubt it affects any other pool.  Based on their post, I'm guessing 50BTC in their infinite lack of wisdom did not invalidate previous jobs, or did not set the difficulty (payout rate) on a per-job basis when a miner changed their difficulty.  This would allow a miner to store up high diff shares (not submit them), then regularly alter their difficulty on the pool interface, and submit them for more credit at a higher difficulty.  It's a completely obvious exploit, but the description points to this scenario.

Fun fact:  I did the math on how much extra payout you'd get on a pool with such an exploit.  I think 50BTC's limit was diff=512, in jumps of powers of 2.  So 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512, 10 different levels.  The formula for how much extra you'd expect to be paid on a power-of-2 difficulty adjustment system is:  (# of difficulty settings + 1) / 2.  So in this case, a person exploiting a manual difficulty adjustment with 10 different levels would be making 5.5x more than they should at a given hash rate.


The luck part isn't a mystery.  40% and 120% days aren't even close to unusual.  I think they were too used to controlling a massive portion of the network, so when they became a relatively small part, they were caught off guard by how much daily variance you see.

[aurel57]

I doubt it affects any other pool.  Based on their post, I'm guessing 50BTC in their infinite lack of wisdom did not invalidate previous jobs, or did not set the difficulty (payout rate) on a per-job basis when a miner changed their difficulty.  This would allow a miner to store up high diff shares (not submit them), then regularly alter their difficulty on the pool interface, and submit them for more credit at a higher difficulty.  It's a completely obvious exploit, but the description points to this scenario.

Fun fact:  I did the math on how much extra payout you'd get on a pool with such an exploit.  I think 50BTC's limit was diff=512, in jumps of powers of 2.  So 1,2,4,8,16,32,64,128,256,512, 10 different levels.  The formula for how much extra you'd expect to be paid on a power-of-2 difficulty adjustment system is:  (# of difficulty settings + 1) / 2.  So in this case, a person exploiting a manual difficulty adjustment with 10 different levels would be making 5.5x more than they should at a given hash rate.


The luck part isn't a mystery.  40% and 120% days aren't even close to unusual.  I think they were too used to controlling a massive portion of the network, so when they became a relatively small part, they were caught off guard by how much daily variance you see.

eleuthria I wanted to thank you, I always value your information (even on competing pools).

[zerocode20]

I am running the proxy's on 2 different desktops both are new installs of windows 7 64bit ultimate that do nothing but mine Usb Eruptors. I originally had a proxy on a windows 7 32bt ultimate machine which did no better.
something else I am noticing, the blade says it is at 6100mh/s yet slush is reporting 5300mh/s over time.
These 2 new blocks that happened slush had it at 6000mh/s after an hour it settles down to 5300. 35minutes into this new block now and its down to 5800 on slush. yet the blade says 6100 over that whole time.

Total MHS:   06157
Received:   0000015854
Accepted:   0000010555
Per Minute:   084.12
Efficiency:   066.57%
Up Time:   0d,02h,05m,28s

now slush showing 5400mh/s 1 hour later.
Total MHS:   06035
Received:   0000019876
Accepted:   0000012974
Per Minute:   082.47
Efficiency:   065.27%
Up Time:   0d,02h,37m,19s

The only other thing I can think of is you network.  The IP address of your proxy has me a bit perplexed...I've not seen that IP range in a consumer router before.  I put all my mining equipment on a separate simple Linksys router so its all on its own network.

If nothing else, you may have just gotten a bad blade and you need to get it exchanged.

What are your DNS settings. I am also under a corporate network, and I had to use my main gateway (or a router gateway) as my main DNS and I used 2.2.2.2 (google) as my second. This seemed to clear up some of my problems, but the systems I have at home (Avalon mini's) are always running at 60GH 24/7. My 115GH Avalon clones fluctuate from 98GH to 120GH on Slush throughout the day, but they both seem to get the same amount of shares in proportion to what the ones at home get, so I don't understand the fluctuations .... but at least they seem to be operating properly.

[hologram]

hi,

where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?

[scooter]

hi,

where i can talk with a slush pool administrator ?

You must travel to their location and speak with them in person. But only after passing a background check and paying a fee of 142 BTC.

[hologram]

seriously, i have issues with my account.
just in PM or E-mail

[DarkMatter]

Our luck is going down the drain 

[zerocode20]

Our luck is going down the drain 

Well, it was nice last week. Now, this is just plain awful.

[opentoe]

I just recently switched to Slush's pool, literally 20 minutes ago with my KNC miner. My miner stats page and cgminer says I'm hashing at 280Gh/s, but on Slush's pool profile page I'm only seeing 166381.1 Mh/s which is only 166Gh/s, right?

Where is the missing hash rate going?

[Trongersoll]

I just recently switched to Slush's pool, literally 20 minutes ago with my KNC miner. My miner stats page and cgminer says I'm hashing at 280Gh/s, but on Slush's pool profile page I'm only seeing 166381.1 Mh/s which is only 166Gh/s, right?

Where is the missing hash rate going?

How long the block has been running affects the reported hashrate. It won't be correct until a new block is started.

[Mudbankkeith]

I just recently switched to Slush's pool, literally 20 minutes ago with my KNC miner. My miner stats page and cgminer says I'm hashing at 280Gh/s, but on Slush's pool profile page I'm only seeing 166381.1 Mh/s which is only 166Gh/s, right?

Where is the missing hash rate going?

The average hash rate on slush takes 10 rounds to show correctly.
The approximate rate for your individual slush miner needs a few hours to stabilize.

[mdopro1]

Our luck is going down the drain 

Well, it was nice last week. Now, this is just plain awful.

It's the same anywhere you mine at the moment.

[RayJay]

hmm,
my block reward dropped from 0.025 to 0.0215 progressively in the last 10 hours, that's close to a 20% decrease !
please correct me, but I don't remember the pool hash-rate being much lower 10 hours ago, or was there really a almost 20% increase in hash power in recent hours ?
my 3 AVALON's hashing  constant at 240 - 245 G/hash per sec.

anybody else ?

[mdopro1]

20% change can be variance and hash power increase combined together.

[RayJay]

ok, it must be variance.
block 20642 and block 20656 round length was exactly the same ( 1hour  10min )
in the same round time I had 10.000 shares less in round 20656 and 20% less payout.
so I guess on top of the bad pool luck I now also have bad luck and a constant low variance 

I wish Slush would have a user hash rate graph ( like WeMineLTC ) that would show the variance over time.

[timmmers]

seriously, i have issues with my account.
just in PM or E-mail

Live support on the account page ?

[hologram]

nobody answer on IRC

[Mudbankkeith]

nobody answer on IRC

While you wait for a reply, open a new account, (with all the hacking/ddos crap lately), a new account with a new password is good insurance.

[bspurloc]

I am running the proxy's on 2 different desktops both are new installs of windows 7 64bit ultimate that do nothing but mine Usb Eruptors. I originally had a proxy on a windows 7 32bt ultimate machine which did no better.
something else I am noticing, the blade says it is at 6100mh/s yet slush is reporting 5300mh/s over time.
These 2 new blocks that happened slush had it at 6000mh/s after an hour it settles down to 5300. 35minutes into this new block now and its down to 5800 on slush. yet the blade says 6100 over that whole time.

Total MHS:   06157
Received:   0000015854
Accepted:   0000010555
Per Minute:   084.12
Efficiency:   066.57%
Up Time:   0d,02h,05m,28s

now slush showing 5400mh/s 1 hour later.
Total MHS:   06035
Received:   0000019876
Accepted:   0000012974
Per Minute:   082.47
Efficiency:   065.27%
Up Time:   0d,02h,37m,19s

The only other thing I can think of is you network.  The IP address of your proxy has me a bit perplexed...I've not seen that IP range in a consumer router before.  I put all my mining equipment on a separate simple Linksys router so its all on its own network.

If nothing else, you may have just gotten a bad blade and you need to get it exchanged.

What are your DNS settings. I am also under a corporate network, and I had to use my main gateway (or a router gateway) as my main DNS and I used 2.2.2.2 (google) as my second. This seemed to clear up some of my problems, but the systems I have at home (Avalon mini's) are always running at 60GH 24/7. My 115GH Avalon clones fluctuate from 98GH to 120GH on Slush throughout the day, but they both seem to get the same amount of shares in proportion to what the ones at home get, so I don't understand the fluctuations .... but at least they seem to be operating properly.

Internal DNS. dns shouldnt have anything to do with anything since the blade isnt being asked to resolve anything. its only task is to ask for work from an IP u gave it hash and return the results to the IP's. no where in that process is any name resolution taking place. but who knows what possible secret other stuff it may be doing.
I have the blade up to 7gh/s now. I put 2 bfgminers on a server and pointed the blade to 2 ip's on the server. so now it is mining steady but maxes out at 7gh/s. and as mentioned if I point it to the same ip it will cease to work, it will get 40 work units then just sit there only rebooting it will get it to ask for more work 40units and done. it demands to have 2 working ip's.
 I am thinking of hard resetting the blade to see if that clears up something possibly wrong with it.

[RayJay]

Block 266975 shows up double on Blockchain, one of them is showing as (Orphaned) ?
Lets hope at least the first one is Valid.