A spam attack can easily destroy the new Viabtc BCH chain

[chek2fire]

I just think that a spam transaction attack can easily destroy Viabtc BCH chain. The reason is that this chain will have a very small hashrate, it need many days for the difficulty correction and until then their chain will be stuck.
A malicious person can begin to spam attack this chain and fill the mempool with a huge amount of transaction.
This will be a disaster cocktail and i dont think this small chain can handle the amount of work that need to clear the mempool.
Of course this attack can happen only from a big bitcoin holder.

[ebliever]

Shhh... I thought about this, and how funny it would be if someone spammed their chain to fill the 8 MB blocks just to show the futility of a big-block based scaling solution.

I don't expect BCH to survive very long one way or another. Between poor, rushed coding, vulnerability to mining reorgs by a hostile miner, spam attacks, relentless dumping from BTC supporters, risk of replay attacks if not handled well, and risk of malware splitting tools it's just a question of what will do it in first.

[matt4054]

Seriously, every transaction in the world ever, stored locally on everyone's smartphone so they can buy a beer with Bitcoin Cash?

I suspect the popcorn manufacturing industry to be the mastermind behind Bitcoin Cash  

The fact is, I'm not against Bitcoin Cash per se (only against its confusing name FWIW), but I'd like to know more about this:

New SigHash Type - As part of the replay protection technology, Bitcoin Cash introduces a new way of signing transactions. This also brings additional benefits such as input value signing for improved hardware wallet security, and elimination of the quadratic hashing problem.

How so?

[ChironRegera]

Seriously, every transaction in the world ever, stored locally on everyone's smartphone so they can buy a beer with Bitcoin Cash?

I suspect the popcorn manufacturing industry to be the mastermind behind Bitcoin Cash  

The fact is, I'm not against Bitcoin Cash per se (only against its confusing name FWIW), but I'd like to know more about this:

New SigHash Type - As part of the replay protection technology, Bitcoin Cash introduces a new way of signing transactions. This also brings additional benefits such as input value signing for improved hardware wallet security, and elimination of the quadratic hashing problem.

How so?

You're asking this question on bitcointalk? lol

[matt4054]

You're asking this question on bitcointalk? lol

Actually I was expecting to find the answer there, but it only addresses replay protection. Care to elaborate?

Hint: I'm not looking for opinion or debates, only science and facts. They're missing from BitcoinCash.org ATM.

[Scorpion]

I have the same concern about ViaBTC I think they will quite vulnerable especially the first few days and susceptible to a spam attack, hey I wish them the best but chances this chain is dead on arrival. No crypto is as strong as Bitcoin if you think about it.

[Wind_FURY]

BCH chain will have a small hash rate? I thought the powers of Jihan Wu and some of the other Chinese miners are riding under his banner in support of the fork?

[~Bitcoin~]

BCH chain will have a small hash rate? I thought the powers of Jihan Wu and some of the other Chinese miners are riding under his banner in support of the fork?

But it will be way lower than what BTC segwit will have after the split. BTC supporters can easily attack this minor chain and like OP have speculated BCC might struggle to survive from spam attacks.

[pdpanzer]

BCH chain will have a small hash rate? I thought the powers of Jihan Wu and some of the other Chinese miners are riding under his banner in support of the fork?

But it will be way lower than what BTC segwit will have after the split. BTC supporters can easily attack this minor chain and like OP have speculated BCC might struggle to survive from spam attacks.

Doesn't bitcoincash have an adaptive difficulty unlike BTC? If there is a spam attack, there will be network congestion, and there will be a huge drop in difficulty, making mining there very profitable if you point your miners to the right place. Bitmain and VIA partners have quite a bit of hash power. Actually, they may have a lot more than we think, given they also have older mining equipment that wasn't profitable right now.

I think BCC can be spam-attacked, and it may be its end. Or maybe it's the beginning of a great future? If it is established it suffered large scale spam attacks and it is able to clear them reasonably well (not perfectly, just ok), I think it will give credibility to the coin.

[25hashcoin]

Go for it. You will just encourage a large miner to move more hashrate to it. Also, good luck with that, lmfao.


BitcoinCash = Satoshis Vision = Bitcoin

[odolvlobo]

I just think that a spam transaction attack can easily destroy Viabtc BCH chain. The reason is that this chain will have a very small hashrate, it need many days for the difficulty correction and until then their chain will be stuck.
A malicious person can begin to spam attack this chain and fill the mempool with a huge amount of transaction.
This will be a disaster cocktail and i dont think this small chain can handle the amount of work that need to clear the mempool.

A spam attack would only raise the transaction fees. It wouldn't prevent a transaction with a high enough fee from being confirmed.

[HostFat]

Miners/pools are already NOT accepting tx with fee less than certain amount, so it will be the same for Bitcoin Cash.
Attacking the network to congest it will just cost more, much more then on the current Bitcoin with only 1 MB of block size (that it is already full)

[pooya87]

I just think that a spam transaction attack can easily destroy Viabtc BCH chain. The reason is that this chain will have a very small hashrate, it need many days for the difficulty correction and until then their chain will be stuck.
A malicious person can begin to spam attack this chain and fill the mempool with a huge amount of transaction.
This will be a disaster cocktail and i dont think this small chain can handle the amount of work that need to clear the mempool.

A spam attack would only raise the transaction fees. It wouldn't prevent a transaction with a high enough fee from being confirmed.

it is not about confirming transactions with high fees. it is about attacking the network. and effects of a spam attack is far more than just increasing the fees.
and during the initial stage that there are a lot of transactions and a long time between each blocks spamming is easy. it can easily be increased to 200,000-500,000 unconfirmed transactions with very low cost. and how long before nodes stop functioning and how long before they implement the same fee policy as core (the same thing they were crying about)!

[Pe4kin]

I just think that a spam transaction attack can easily destroy Viabtc BCH chain. The reason is that this chain will have a very small hashrate, it need many days for the difficulty correction and until then their chain will be stuck.
A malicious person can begin to spam attack this chain and fill the mempool with a huge amount of transaction.
This will be a disaster cocktail and i dont think this small chain can handle the amount of work that need to clear the mempool.

A spam attack would only raise the transaction fees. It wouldn't prevent a transaction with a high enough fee from being confirmed.

it is not about confirming transactions with high fees. it is about attacking the network. and effects of a spam attack is far more than just increasing the fees.
and during the initial stage that there are a lot of transactions and a long time between each blocks spamming is easy. it can easily be increased to 200,000-500,000 unconfirmed transactions with very low cost. and how long before nodes stop functioning and how long before they implement the same fee policy as core (the same thing they were crying about)!

Exactly the same can be done with bitcoin! With him even easier to do. Block size less than 8 times.
Or do you think that will only attack you one?
And no one to apply retaliatory measures will not?
Bitcoin such a war will harm only.

[iamnewhere]

the first "tx-spam-attack" will be the dump where everyone wants to be first to get at least some money from their free BCH - the prevention of that attack might be the lack of people willing to pay real money for an actual free coin so the amount of transactions could be limited.

[odolvlobo]

I just think that a spam transaction attack can easily destroy Viabtc BCH chain. The reason is that this chain will have a very small hashrate, it need many days for the difficulty correction and until then their chain will be stuck.
A malicious person can begin to spam attack this chain and fill the mempool with a huge amount of transaction.
This will be a disaster cocktail and i dont think this small chain can handle the amount of work that need to clear the mempool.

A spam attack would only raise the transaction fees. It wouldn't prevent a transaction with a high enough fee from being confirmed.

it is not about confirming transactions with high fees. it is about attacking the network. and effects of a spam attack is far more than just increasing the fees.
and during the initial stage that there are a lot of transactions and a long time between each blocks spamming is easy. it can easily be increased to 200,000-500,000 unconfirmed transactions with very low cost. and how long before nodes stop functioning and how long before they implement the same fee policy as core (the same thing they were crying about)!

A spam attack on the network will not affect me because I will ensure that each of my transactions will be confirmed in the next block or two by paying a sufficient fee.

[JorisK]

I don't like BCH at all, but destroying something should not be our way.

Leave it to the market.

[Xavofat]

In case you're forgetting, BITMAIN's hashrate is going to stay on the New York agreement, and not switch to BCH.  If the price of BCH rises high, it could take a while for miners to adapt to the price and start directing some hashrate at BCH.

A spam attack on the network will not affect me because I will ensure that each of my transactions will be confirmed in the next block or two by paying a sufficient fee.

If the network is constantly full, users would have to compete with fees in order to get space in the block, just like they were doing on the original BTC during the recent spam attacks.  The fees can always spiral higher if the attacker is persistent.

[Wind_FURY]

BCH chain will have a small hash rate? I thought the powers of Jihan Wu and some of the other Chinese miners are riding under his banner in support of the fork?

But it will be way lower than what BTC segwit will have after the split. BTC supporters can easily attack this minor chain and like OP have speculated BCC might struggle to survive from spam attacks.

Why would the Bitcoin supporters attack the BCH chain if it is better for them to leave it alone and hold or sell their free BCH coins? I believe this is where game theory applies. What is more profitable for you and the everyone else, to spam and attack BCH or leave it be and let them develop on their own?

[pooya87]

I just think that a spam transaction attack can easily destroy Viabtc BCH chain. The reason is that this chain will have a very small hashrate, it need many days for the difficulty correction and until then their chain will be stuck.
A malicious person can begin to spam attack this chain and fill the mempool with a huge amount of transaction.
This will be a disaster cocktail and i dont think this small chain can handle the amount of work that need to clear the mempool.

A spam attack would only raise the transaction fees. It wouldn't prevent a transaction with a high enough fee from being confirmed.

it is not about confirming transactions with high fees. it is about attacking the network. and effects of a spam attack is far more than just increasing the fees.
and during the initial stage that there are a lot of transactions and a long time between each blocks spamming is easy. it can easily be increased to 200,000-500,000 unconfirmed transactions with very low cost. and how long before nodes stop functioning and how long before they implement the same fee policy as core (the same thing they were crying about)!

Exactly the same can be done with bitcoin! With him even easier to do. Block size less than 8 times.
Or do you think that will only attack you one?
And no one to apply retaliatory measures will not?
Bitcoin such a war will harm only.

i didn't say it won't happen on bitcoin. the spam attack can happen and is happening against bitcoin. and it can happen on any other altcoin too.
it is about the effects that a spam attack can have on different cryptocurrency networks. for example a couple of weeks ago a simple surge of transactions (not a spam attack!) crippled ethereum network.

with bitcoin and the limited block size, a spam attack will increase the fee and the spammers will be forced to pay more and more if they want to continue disturbing the network. so it will become costly and it happens fast.

with BCC with a big block (Bitcoin Unlimited) the spam will be a lot cheaper to perform and because of lack of fee mechanism it will stay lower. in the end the effects such spam attack have on BCC can be prolonged a lot more than it can be prolonged on bitcoin and the damage will me more severe.