"51% actor or botnet could manipulate the source code of the bitcoin network"

[weav]

In the Winklevoss IPO filing:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312513279830/d562329ds1.htm

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network, such actor or botnet could manipulate the source code of the Bitcoin Network or the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

I get that such an attacker can double spend their own coins, but how does controlling more than 50% of the hashrate allow anybody to manipulate the source code??

[1714706320]

1714706320

[1714706320]

1714706320

[1714706320]

1714706320

[Remember remember the 5th of November]

LOL, extreme fail right there.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I agree it is pretty horribly written but manipulate doesn't have to mean "modify".  Someone with 51% of the network can manipulate (exploit) the limits of the software/code namely double spend coins, reverse transactions, etc.   

The S-1 is essentially a rough draft.  Hopefully they have some Bitcoin experts go over it before publishing the final prospectus.

[razorfishsl]

Anyone WITH >50% of the network CAN write their OWN software and effectively manipulate the future block chain  almost anyway they like.... as long as they maintain the protocol...
They DON'T need to supply the re-written software to the other miners/ users of the network.
There are a number of 'myths' related to bitcoin one of which is that you must use the publicly released software.

Consider it like the MATRIX.
The system has 'rules' but you can bend them. IF you are the controlling interest.
If you change the rules to far, you are no longer part of the system but become a separate entity however any damage you did... prior to that is perpetuated by the remaining miners.

The paper is accurate in as far as it goes, its just not very well put.

Consider bitcoin as the crucible of cypto-currency research.
Some people are stupid/desperate enough to want to take experimental treatments.(or greedy enough to exploit their fellow man at every opportunity), just look at paid drug trials...

Let the fuck fest begin.......

[John (John K.)]

Meh, at this rate they'll need an ASIC botnet to get even 5%. It's great that GPU/CPU mining is phasing out now. No more 'omg I got this viruz thats mining this shady bitocins' PMs anymore!

[razorfishsl]

Fail.....

Just run a mining pool.... then subvert it.

They don't 'need' to own anything.
As for the  no more viruses that is an even bigger FAIL.... you just target the infrastructure running the ASICs, you know.... the things like the Raspberry pi and hacked routers...

[weav]

Anyone WITH >50% of the network CAN write their OWN software and effectively manipulate the future block chain  almost anyway they like.... as long as they maintain the protocol...
They DON'T need to supply the re-written software to the other miners/ users of the network.
There are a number of 'myths' related to bitcoin one of which is that you must use the publicly released software.

Consider it like the MATRIX.
The system has 'rules' but you can bend them. IF you are the controlling interest.
If you change the rules to far, you are no longer part of the system but become a separate entity however any damage you did... prior to that is perpetuated by the remaining miners.

The paper is accurate in as far as it goes, its just not very well put.

Consider bitcoin as the crucible of cypto-currency research.
Some people are stupid/desperate enough to want to take experimental treatments.(or greedy enough to exploit their fellow man at every opportunity), just look at paid drug trials...

Let the fuck fest begin.......

Fail.....

Just run a mining pool.... then subvert it.

They don't 'need' to own anything.
As for the  no more viruses that is an even bigger FAIL.... you just target the infrastructure running the ASICs, you know.... the things like the Raspberry pi and hacked routers...

Thanks, good insight.

[gweedo]

yeah this is a fail

Winklevoss Twins if you need some technical help I am more than open to you guys and can even prove my advanced technical knowledge of the bitcoin client and protocol

[jl2012]

In the Winklevoss IPO filing:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312513279830/d562329ds1.htm

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network, such actor or botnet could manipulate the source code of the Bitcoin Network or the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

I get that such an attacker can double spend their own coins, but how does controlling more than 50% of the hashrate allow anybody to manipulate the source code??

Yes, people COULD manipulate the source code if they control >50%.

Just imagine a government with >50% wants to request everyone register their bitcoin addresses. They will put these addresses to a whitelist, and only those transactions sending money to whitelist addresses will be accepted. They will also publish the whitelist and request all miners to follow. They will reject any blocks involving non-whitelist addresses. In order to survive, miners have to follow the rules and modify their bitcoind sourcecode to implement the whitelist policy.

Winklevoss uses the word "manipulate", which means "to influence or manage shrewdly or deviously".

[weav]

In the Winklevoss IPO filing:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312513279830/d562329ds1.htm

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network, such actor or botnet could manipulate the source code of the Bitcoin Network or the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

I get that such an attacker can double spend their own coins, but how does controlling more than 50% of the hashrate allow anybody to manipulate the source code??

Yes, people COULD manipulate the source code if they control >50%.

Just imagine a government with >50% wants to request everyone register their bitcoin addresses. They will put these addresses to a whitelist, and only those transactions sending money to whitelist addresses will be accepted. They will also publish the whitelist and request all miners to follow. They will reject any blocks involving non-whitelist addresses. In order to survive, miners have to follow the rules and modify their bitcoind sourcecode to implement the whitelist policy.

Winklevoss uses the word "manipulate", which means "to influence or manage shrewdly or deviously".

Good point, thanks.

[MagicBit15]

In the Winklevoss IPO filing:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312513279830/d562329ds1.htm

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network, such actor or botnet could manipulate the source code of the Bitcoin Network or the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

I get that such an attacker can double spend their own coins, but how does controlling more than 50% of the hashrate allow anybody to manipulate the source code??

I seriously have no comment, my IQ has been lowered...

[jl2012]

In the Winklevoss IPO filing:

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1579346/000119312513279830/d562329ds1.htm

If a malicious actor or botnet obtains control in excess of 50 percent of the processing power active on the Bitcoin Network, such actor or botnet could manipulate the source code of the Bitcoin Network or the Blockchain in a manner that adversely affects an investment in the Shares or the ability of the Trust to operate.

I get that such an attacker can double spend their own coins, but how does controlling more than 50% of the hashrate allow anybody to manipulate the source code??

Yes, people COULD manipulate the source code if they control >50%.

Just imagine a government with >50% wants to request everyone register their bitcoin addresses. They will put these addresses to a whitelist, and only those transactions sending money to whitelist addresses will be accepted. They will also publish the whitelist and request all miners to follow. They will reject any blocks involving non-whitelist addresses. In order to survive, miners have to follow the rules and modify their bitcoind sourcecode to implement the whitelist policy.

Winklevoss uses the word "manipulate", which means "to influence or manage shrewdly or deviously".

Good point, thanks.

I had the same doubt as yours when I first read this. IMHO, this IPO document is a very professional summary of bitcoin ecology and the risks of bitcoin investment/technology

[btcrich]

From my understanding, even if you do have 51% of the hashing power, modifying the source code to change the block rate, reward, or difficulty, will have no effect.  Are there any parameters that an attacker with 51% of the hashing power could potentially modify in the source code to gain some kind of advantage or cause damage to the network?

[jl2012]

From my understanding, even if you do have 51% of the hashing power, modifying the source code to change the block rate, reward, or difficulty, will have no effect.  Are there any parameters that an attacker with 51% of the hashing power could potentially modify in the source code to gain some kind of advantage or cause damage to the network?

see my reply at #9.

with similar logic the government with 50% hashing power can also force people to pay transaction tax (by adding an extra output to the gov account for all transaction) or freeze accounts with illegal activity. They can also turn it into a Solidcoin-like system, which requires every block to be signed by the central bank. Zerocoin (if ever implemented) will be prohibited.

p.s. the IPO document says "manipulate", not "modify"