Bitcoin Forum
April 24, 2024, 12:34:51 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Perhaps pool's vulnerability?  (Read 851 times)
mikefdm (OP)
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 81
Merit: 10


View Profile
May 19, 2013, 08:14:13 AM
 #1

Let our miner working with difficulty X.
Let's create another dummy miner with difficulty 2 * X.
Let the first miner sends shares as usual, except for those that are appropriate for the second miner. In this case, we will send shares from the second miner.
If we calculate total confirmed mining speed, it will be 1.5 times higher.

In general, if the number of miners is equal to N, then the expectation of the speed will be (N + 1) / 2 times higher.

I know that this can be fixed simply, just by checking "nonce belongs to work".
The question is whether the pools are not doing such checking?
1713918891
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713918891

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713918891
Reply with quote  #2

1713918891
Report to moderator
1713918891
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1713918891

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1713918891
Reply with quote  #2

1713918891
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
-ck
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631


Ruu \o/


View Profile WWW
May 19, 2013, 08:16:41 AM
 #2

They are

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

Activity: 140
Merit: 100


View Profile
May 19, 2013, 08:28:09 AM
 #3

most pools shouldn't have this issue. if different connection have different extranonce1 and only one (connection, worker, diff) => extranonce1 combination is allowed.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750
Merit: 1007



View Profile
May 19, 2013, 03:28:17 PM
 #4

Stratum should be immune to this unless the pool is attempting to let two workers run at different difficulties over a single connection.  By default, Stratum defines difficulty per-connection, along with a unique extranonce per connection.  This would make it impossible to shift shares between different difficulty workers unless the pool is doing something very stupid.

Getwork is the only method I believe *could* have this flaw by default, however I think there are only a handful of pools which offer multiple difficulties over getwork.  Similar to the Stratum situation, all the pool would have to do is add a number to the coinbase to represent the difficulty the work is supposed to meet.

RIP BTC Guild, April 2011 - June 2015
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!