Is Node Security a Mirage? Given how most people use Closed Source OS

[profitgenerator212]

Is the security of the Node network in Bitcoin or for that matter any other altcoin (for other altcoins with low node count it's much worse) a mirage given how most users use closed source OS for mining and node hosting?

• At the moment we have 9468 operational nodes.
• According to latest stats only 6% of users use Linux.

This means that only 568 nodes are potentially secure, the other 8900 are very likely to be a smokescreen. 94% of the Nodes are very likely vulnerable to any kind of cyberattack, which is a lot higher than 49% on which the node security relies.


Call me crazy, but I don't regard closed source virus infested crap OS-s viable for any kind financially sensitive project. These closed source OS-s are really a joke, and they are a joke on you guys who are using them not knowing what kind of potential backdoor or malware it could have, and on us, who should have here a secure network of decentralized nodes, but instead of that we are getting fake security.

Any major cyberattack can turn those other 8900 nodes into a botnet at the mercy of some sophisticated hacker group:
* https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/09/backdoor-malware-planted-in-legitimate-software-updates-to-ccleaner
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ransomware
* http://thehackernews.com/2017/08/facebook-virus-hacking.html
* https://thehackernews.com/2017/08/chrome-extension-hacking.html
* http://thehackernews.com/2017/08/powerpoint-malware-ms-office.html
* and the list goes on and on and on....


And then it's game over for Bitcoin.

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

You are right, ideally you should be using Linux or any other open source OS to run your full validating node, but even if it's windows... so what? as long as you keep your private keys safe, what can a hacker do to the network of nodes run under windows? they can't access the blocks data and change or whatever, the software is going to continue  working as intended even if the computer is infected. If the person is saving BTC there then that's his problem, not yours. As long as you have your keys safe, you are safe.

I don't see any realistic attacks that could compromise the network because its run on windows. Maybe a coordinated shutdown or something? I don't know. It would need to be some next level crazy shit tho, in order to pull that off in tons of computers at the same time period.

[profitgenerator212]

You are right, ideally you should be using Linux or any other open source OS to run your full validating node, but even if it's windows... so what? as long as you keep your private keys safe, what can a hacker do to the network of nodes run under windows? they can't access the blocks data and change or whatever, the software is going to continue  working as intended even if the computer is infected. If the person is saving BTC there then that's his problem, not yours. As long as you have your keys safe, you are safe.

I don't see any realistic attacks that could compromise the network because its run on windows. Maybe a coordinated shutdown or something? I don't know. It would need to be some next level crazy shit tho, in order to pull that off in tons of computers at the same time period.

Well if they can hack 51% of the nodes then we are fucked. And if my math skills are right it looks like 94% of the nodes are heavily exposed to this possibility.

[hatshepsut93]

Well if they can hack 51% of the nodes then we are fucked. And if my math skills are right it looks like 94% of the nodes are heavily exposed to this possibility.

Hacking non-mining nodes won't enable a 51% attack, you'd need to hack specifically mining nodes, which is obviously much harder. But some of your concerns are valid, because hacked full nodes can still be used for different attacks, just not as serious as the 51% attack. But I think it's very unrealistic, if there were some major vulnerabilities in popular closed-source OS's, our whole economy would start falling apart. For example, when there was a wave of ransomware attacks, it was mostly old Win XP that were affected, and still it was quite damaging. The other problem is that governments together with software companies could develop backdoors specifically for Bitcoin, but this could start a huge legal issues.

[profitgenerator212]

Well if they can hack 51% of the nodes then we are fucked. And if my math skills are right it looks like 94% of the nodes are heavily exposed to this possibility.

Hacking non-mining nodes won't enable a 51% attack, you'd need to hack specifically mining nodes, which is obviously much harder. But some of your concerns are valid, because hacked full nodes can still be used for different attacks, just not as serious as the 51% attack. But I think it's very unrealistic, if there were some major vulnerabilities in popular closed-source OS's, our whole economy would start falling apart. For example, when there was a wave of ransomware attacks, it was mostly old Win XP that were affected, and still it was quite damaging. The other problem is that governments together with software companies could develop backdoors specifically for Bitcoin, but this could start a huge legal issues.

Yes but you need all nodes to verify the integrity of the blockchain. Mining nodes only verify incoming blocks they dont verify already stored blocks.

It's up to a wide and large decentralized node network to ensure that the blockchain is what it meant to be, and that nobody can backwards corrupt it to erase or modify transactions retroactively.

[aleksej996]

Is the security of the Node network in Bitcoin or for that matter any other altcoin (for other altcoins with low node count it's much worse) a mirage given how most users use closed source OS for mining and node hosting?

• At the moment we have 9468 operational nodes.
• According to latest stats only 6% of users use Linux.

This means that only 568 nodes are potentially secure, the others are very likely a smokescreen. 94% of the Nodes are very likely vulnerable to any kind of cyberattack, which is a lot higher than 49% on which the node security relies.


Call me crazy, but I don't regard closed source virus infested crap OS-s viable for any kind financially sensitive project. These closed source OS-s are really a joke, and they are a joke on you guys who are using them not knowing what kind of potential backdoor or malware it could have, and on us who should have here a secure network of decentralized nodes..... WHICH COULD TURN INSTANTLY INTO A FUCKING BOTNET IF A SOPHISTICATED HACKER COULD INFECT THEM.

Wow. You just butchered the statistics here.
Those are the stats of OSes reported by the browsers "collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2003", not the Bitcoin nodes.

First of all, I would hope that Bitcoin community uses open source OSes in a bigger percentage then W3Schools visitors, due to the whole point of Bitcoin being transparent and all. So this forums stats would be a lot more accurate of course, but still not quite there.

Running a full node is a whole different story then browsing the Internet, it is more like running a server. After all, you need to have an open connection to the Internet for this, so you would need to setup port forwarding or use Tor hidden services. Servers are usually Linux systems, for stability and security reasons.
So that could impact the stats the most.

I guess you could try to scan the Bitcoin nodes for other ports opened on those IPs for hopes of Windows users forwarding more ports. That would make it possible to figure out the OS of the node with some degree of accuracy. But it is obvious that precise stats are impossible to come by.

[AtheistAKASaneBrain]

Well if they can hack 51% of the nodes then we are fucked. And if my math skills are right it looks like 94% of the nodes are heavily exposed to this possibility.

Hacking non-mining nodes won't enable a 51% attack, you'd need to hack specifically mining nodes, which is obviously much harder. But some of your concerns are valid, because hacked full nodes can still be used for different attacks, just not as serious as the 51% attack. But I think it's very unrealistic, if there were some major vulnerabilities in popular closed-source OS's, our whole economy would start falling apart. For example, when there was a wave of ransomware attacks, it was mostly old Win XP that were affected, and still it was quite damaging. The other problem is that governments together with software companies could develop backdoors specifically for Bitcoin, but this could start a huge legal issues.

Getting rid of all non mining nodes would be pretty brutal for the network since they validate the transactions and ultimately full validating nodes dictate what bitcoin is (which is why criminals like Gavin Andresen, Jihad Wu, Roger Ver, Jeff Garzik, Mike Hearn, FakeSatoshi... and the list goes on) all want to get rid of small blocks and put huge blocks in place.

But in any case, thanks to the network being widespread in tons of different computers with people all over the world, it is pretty much impossible that the exploit is executed all at once generating chaos. Someone will notice and it will quickly get fixed.

[profitgenerator212]

OOOPS!

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/09/backdoor-malware-planted-in-legitimate-software-updates-to-ccleaner

I guess only 2,000,000,000 computers are now potentially compromized due to a small fiasco like this one.

I am sure the Bitcoin network is strong and resilient now is it? ... while all shitty OS-s get compromized day-in day-out by sophisticated hackers.



Well well well, this proves my point more than anything.

[profitgenerator212]

Wow. You just butchered the statistics here.
Those are the stats of OSes reported by the browsers "collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2003", not the Bitcoin nodes.

No it is intersection of correlated samples, while the error margin increases if we mix 2 samples together that are not entirely correlated, since the W3Schools data is a general data it should pretty much be ok to use it.

After all we dont what OS the nodes use there is no way to verify that.


I am sure the amount of Linux users amongst nodes is higher, but it's not higher by a lot. I see people mining on Windows all the time, even in Monero which supposed to be a ultra high-tech currency which didn't have a GUI wallet just now recently so you'd think that only sophisticated console Linux  nerds would use it, but nope, there are plenty of Windows users out there too, which is funny since Monero is the supposed "privacy" currency while Windows 10 is a literal privacy nightmare.

[aleksej996]

OOOPS!

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/09/backdoor-malware-planted-in-legitimate-software-updates-to-ccleaner

I guess only 2,000,000,000 computers are now potentially compromized due to a small fiasco like this one.

I am sure the Bitcoin network is strong and resilient now is it? ... while all shitty OS-s get compromized day-in day-out by sophisticated hackers.



Well well well, this proves my point more than anything.

Yeah, I heard about this. Very bad news. However, only people who updated during that time period were infected. And I would say that Windows users hate updates, which is a security problem on it's own, but this time might save them.

Wow. You just butchered the statistics here.
Those are the stats of OSes reported by the browsers "collected from W3Schools' log-files since 2003", not the Bitcoin nodes.

No it is intersection of correlated samples, while the error margin increases if we mix 2 samples together that are not entirely correlated, since the W3Schools data is a general data it should pretty much be ok to use it.

After all we dont what OS the nodes use there is no way to verify that.


I am sure the amount of Linux users amongst nodes is higher, but it's not higher by a lot. I see people mining on Windows all the time, even in Monero which supposed to be a ultra high-tech currency which didn't have a GUI wallet just now recently so you'd think that only sophisticated console Linux  nerds would use it, but nope, there are plenty of Windows users out there too, which is funny since Monero is the supposed "privacy" currency while Windows 10 is a literal privacy nightmare.

Yeah. It isn't good anyway. I have hopes, but it still makes sense that a majority is Windows users. However, you really only need to be connected to one good node out of many to be secure, as it will provide the "longest" chain. The miners however are a vulnerable to majority attacks and I don't know how Bitcoin miners usually run their rigs. Always assumed that it is either by Linux or a embedded system in their miners which they access through webpages on LAN.

[Kprawn]

If you use OS's with proprietary code, you are vulnerable to any kind of exploit that are imbedded in their code. Any Windows

based OS is a total fkup. The mainstream closed OS's are also reporting to their own governments, so nobody knows what

personal info are travelling through their servers. These OS's are also the most targeted by hackers. 

There has been an overall increase in number of vulnerabilities for all operating systems, irrespective of brand – Microsoft or

Linux..Microsoft's operating systems once again took top spot, overtaking Apple iOS, which had the highest number of

vulnerabilities last year.Feb 3, 2014

[profitgenerator212]

If you use OS's with proprietary code, you are vulnerable to any kind of exploit that are imbedded in their code. Any Windows

based OS is a total fkup. The mainstream closed OS's are also reporting to their own governments, so nobody knows what

personal info are travelling through their servers. These OS's are also the most targeted by hackers. 

There has been an overall increase in number of vulnerabilities for all operating systems, irrespective of brand – Microsoft or

Linux..Microsoft's operating systems once again took top spot, overtaking Apple iOS, which had the highest number of

vulnerabilities last year.Feb 3, 2014

Windows 10 has a literal keylogger in it, which can allegedly be turned off, allegedly since we can't be certainly sure since the code is not open.

Yep, so it's Cisco (I assume the routers) and MS. Who would have thought?

Wasn't it Snowden that warned us about the routers being insecure?

I am not even surprized by Java, I don't know why people use that instead of Python.

What is the source of this data?

[profitgenerator212]

The miners however are a vulnerable to majority attacks and I don't know how Bitcoin miners usually run their rigs. Always assumed that it is either by Linux or a embedded system in their miners which they access through webpages on LAN.

Don't overestimate the security.

The way I understand mining works is that you have a driver software for the miner apparatus, in case of an ASIC or a video card possibly similar.

Then you have the miner software, which communicates with the driver, which communicates with the mining hardware.

So the point of failure is still the main computer that controls the miners and is connected to the internet or a mining pool.

A million things can go wrong, from potential DDOS, MITM of the pool server, all sorts of nasty stuff.

Luckily in mining there is a clear financial stake, so it's in their best interest to figure out if they have been compromized, otherwise they lose a lot of money.

McAfee talked about this recently:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syI9X_uKvUA

[aleksej996]

The miners however are a vulnerable to majority attacks and I don't know how Bitcoin miners usually run their rigs. Always assumed that it is either by Linux or a embedded system in their miners which they access through webpages on LAN.

Don't overestimate the security.

The way I understand mining works is that you have a driver software for the miner apparatus, in case of an ASIC or a video card possibly similar.

Then you have the miner software, which communicates with the driver, which communicates with the mining hardware.

So the point of failure is still the main computer that controls the miners and is connected to the internet or a mining pool.

A million things can go wrong, from potential DDOS, MITM of the pool server, all sorts of nasty stuff.

Luckily in mining there is a clear financial stake, so it's in their best interest to figure out if they have been compromized, otherwise they lose a lot of money.

McAfee talked about this recently:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=syI9X_uKvUA

That sounds pretty bad. Sooner or later there will be malware that will have a built in capability of conducting a 51% attack using miner rigs if it reaches a majority hashrate by infection. This just seems like an accident waiting to happen then.

[leopard2]

Just that an OS is closed source does not mean it is easier to hack. In fact open source could be easier to exploit because the source is open....

or simply because average Linux user is having a less properly updated and maintained system than average Windows user 

Back doors is a different story. I guess Microsoft could be under national security letters...but would they use it on a grand scale, to destroy BTC? Putting themselves out of business? Probably not.

You never know though.

BTC would survive, via hardfork. MS Windows would not survive, if they were forced by USG to attack thousands of BTC nodes via backdoor.  

[profitgenerator212]

That sounds pretty bad. Sooner or later there will be malware that will have a built in capability of conducting a 51% attack using miner rigs if it reaches a majority hashrate by infection. This just seems like an accident waiting to happen then.

It is. Mcafee talked about this that now even your average PC user's computer has value on it. The ransomwares are only the first wave built mostly by amateurs.

When the professional hackers, possibly from enemy governments , will start hacking cryptos, then we will all be fucked.

Computer security should be the number one concern here really, forget about quantum computers, it's worthless to design strong encryption if the PC has a backdoor.

Just that an OS is closed source does not mean it is easier to hack. In fact open source could be easier to exploit because the source is open....

or simply because average Linux user is having a less properly updated and maintained system than average Windows user 

I disagree closed source doesn't mean code obfuscation in the slightest, even if we ignore potential backdoors.

The Linux monolythic kernel is much better designed than the Windows hybrid one. I have watched a presentation in the past detailing that open source is highly superior to closed source , and this "because the expoit is published" thing is debunked.

It's not just that the closed source OS is not trustworthy, but even their own developers have no idea what is in them, or whether their computers were compromized at compilation, since it's totally closed.

So bugfixing is exponentially harder on closed source OS's. Furthermore just because a lot of bugs are detected in open source is not a bad thing, it's actually a good thing. Imagine how many bugs are not detected in a closed source?

So an open source OS is much closer to perfection, even though bugs will always exist, than a closed source.

Back doors is a different story. I guess Microsoft could be under national security letters...but would they use it on a grand scale, to destroy BTC? Putting themselves out of business? Probably not.

You never know though.

Then there's that.

But the funny thing is that they don't even need to be. Win 10 is literally so privacy invasive that basically anyone who can hack into it get all the data, it's already prepackaged for the hacker thanks to all those horrible telemetry softwares in them.

MS Windows would not survive....

But muh Paint !!!