Bitcoin Forum
December 06, 2016, 10:03:05 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 [332] 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]  (Read 775521 times)
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 01:21:45 PM
 #6621

Curious about this. Perhaps my understanding of a 'block withholding attack' is inaccurate, but are you saying (bolded above) that if a block withholder finds a block they can keep the 25 BTC reward for themselves?

My understanding has been that they can withhold a winning block from the pool, but it wouldn't be seen as a 'winning block' to the bitcoin network (only to the pool) so they wouldn't get the 25 BTC reward either.

You understand correct, but a block withholding attacker would be paid by the pool for all his submitted (non winning) shares. So he would earn just as much as a regular miner per GH. Well, minus that one winning share Smiley

Just so.

Bitcoin network and pool analysis 12QxPHEuxDrs7mCyGSx1iVSozTwtquDB3r
follow @oocBlog for new post notifications
1481061785
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481061785

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481061785
Reply with quote  #2

1481061785
Report to moderator
1481061785
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481061785

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481061785
Reply with quote  #2

1481061785
Report to moderator
1481061785
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481061785

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481061785
Reply with quote  #2

1481061785
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 01:28:41 PM
 #6622

Curious about this. Perhaps my understanding of a 'block withholding attack' is inaccurate, but are you saying (bolded above) that if a block withholder finds a block they can keep the 25 BTC reward for themselves?

No, they can't keep the 25 BTC from blocks they find. They can send the block to the pool or throw it away. Only those two options.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
georgem
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1134


spreadcoin.info


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 01:37:37 PM
 #6623

Curious about this. Perhaps my understanding of a 'block withholding attack' is inaccurate, but are you saying (bolded above) that if a block withholder finds a block they can keep the 25 BTC reward for themselves?

No, they can't keep the 25 BTC from blocks they find. They can send the block to the pool or throw it away. Only those two options.


so the 25 BTC are lost.

So what is the incentive here?
Is this like a goldfinger-tactic? Trying to increase the value of the bitcoins you already have by destroying other bitcoins?
Like the goldfinger guy from the james bond movie, who wanted to increase the value of his gold holdings by radioactively contaminating fort knox.


hamburgerhelper
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 83


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 02:36:03 PM
 #6624


This has an upper tail probability of 0.08264739, meaning that once out of every 12 reruns of those eleven days you'd see multipool have this level of luck. Not very unlucky.

<snip>

If submitted/expected reach 7.0 (one in a thousand) or 8.0 (one in three thousand), I'd start to worry.

OOC, thanks for illustrating exactly how unlucky multipool is - "Not very". I appreciate your effort here. Personally, I found this analysis reassuring.

flound1129, thanks for providing the data which made OOC's analysis possible.
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 02:44:32 PM
 #6625

So what is the incentive here?

Assuming this is even taking place, which Im not convinced off, a large mining entity like ghash might have several incentives to do this; a block witholding attack  would hurt their smaller competitors for almost no cost, possibly driving miners away from these "unlucky" pools towards their own,  and it would keep difficulty artificially low. Once you get big enough,  adding more hashrate doesnt bring you a lot of extra mining revenue, it mostly increases difficulty and therefore your own cost as you start competing with yourself. Then its probably better to hide your hashrate this way, its not adding to difficulty, yet you are still getting paid for it. Maybe organofconti can do the math at what point this makes sense. But this would also explain some of the huge swings we see in the estimated network hashrate, which seem to be too big to be caused by chance.
jamesg
VIP
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1330


AKA: gigavps


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 02:57:49 PM
 #6626

Maybe organofconti can do the math at what point this makes sense.

I'd pay OOC to do this analysis.

We've known for a while that after a single entity becomes a certain percentage of the network you start competing with yourself but Puppet does bring up a good point that those rules can be rewritten by sending hashes elsewhere and block withholding.
khunhamkeng
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 03:06:33 PM
 #6627

Hello everybody

Im surprised that the recent discussion about multipool and the possibility of a share witholding attack
is fought like a battle without real clue.

I start mining with a block erupter in November 2013 and increased hash power with 4 more block erupters, a 8 GH Jalapeno and recently with a KNC Jupiter. All this equipment I bought used.

Since November I didnt solve a block with my small hash power, but earned about 1.2 BTC on Bitminter.

I have not the knowledge and technical abilities to check my miners if they are doing things like that or not.

But I think that this witholding shares attacks are performed fully unintentional because they are creating a loose lossse situation for the miner, the pool operator and the attacker.

So lets go back to the pollite and helpfull features of this forum and dont blame people for completely unproven and unlikely things.

lets hope for another good run of easy find blocks and if you really seeing in every co miner a competitor instead of a colleague you are ready for a solo mining career.

Keep the forum clean of this unproven conspiracy theories or found your own bitcoin sect.

I like bitminter and its pool operator particular for its helpfull attitude towards even the strangest questions. As long as it is newbie friendly it will attract new people. Keep it like this.
Calm Down
Joerg
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 03:22:35 PM
 #6628

But I think that this witholding shares attacks are performed fully unintentional because they are creating a loose lossse situation for the miner, the pool operator and the attacker.

So lets go back to the pollite and helpfull features of this forum and dont blame people for completely unproven and unlikely things.

I dont see the incentive for multipool to perform a block withholding attack, nor  any statistically credible evidence for it. And certainly no one is accusing DrHaribo of anything (other than being too awesome Smiley ).

But If your read a few posts up, you will see that there is indeed an incentive for a dominant mining entity to carry out such an attack, and there is rather credible evidence this has been done on Eligius and BTCguild. So lets not put our heads in the sand, and search for a solution to this problem, even if its only a theoretical problem.

BTW, its possible multipool is being (ab)used as one of many proxies by this dominant entity.
flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


www.multipool.us


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 04:48:02 PM
 #6629

BTW, its possible multipool is being (ab)used as one of many proxies by this dominant entity.

Highly unlikely, as our average worker hashrate is under a few hundred GH.  They'd have to have hundreds of accounts setup in a very specific way using custom software to do what you're talking about.

Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
khunhamkeng
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 05:21:17 PM
 #6630

Im not a native english speaker, may be I have to clarify.

What I mean is, that the best way to make our bitcoin investement a succsess is to attract people into it.

The discussion I saw recently here is doing the opposite.

Thats what I mean.

the technical question of how an attack on mining pools could occur and how to counter it should be done between pool operators and technicians/coders on a seperate issue and not done in a relatively open forum. It drives people away from bitcoin.

I believe that the bitcoin is a good investement because it will attract people with its unique features.

And as it is in the meantime a multi billion industry it is in the interest of all people involved to protect the system.

If someone work to destroy the confidence of the community in bitcoin and in that way destroying your investement, Goldman Sachs,Deutsche Bank, HSBC should be the suspects.

Joerg

Minor Miner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 06:11:52 PM
 #6631

I do not believe in block withholding attacks and I think that people are focusing on the WRONG issue.   The problem that was discovered was the miner did not work correctly (please see below).   Whether it was software (that was easily fixed or hardware which could never be fixed is not known but the owner of the miners said it was a simple software fix).
Also, it should be noted that the most recent example of this attack was apparently not an attack, rather it was probably a software problem - although this should have already been detected during testing on the testnet, so I'm not sure how "unknown" it could have been.

The problem was their software discarding shares that matched 2^32-1 difficulty or better.  Anything UNDER that, they worked fine.  So testnet would not have detected anything wrong.

So, I put it to you all:  
1.  We have someone that has bad luck (lots of people have bad luck runs and there is a 1 in 11 chance of this happening by chance so far).
2.  The person is mining using tons of different hardware (so unless all his clients use the same miner brand and that brand is bad it is not likely the miners)
3.  The person has software that jumps between pools to mine other coins when prices dictate.   Please read the above quote.   SOFTWARE problem.   Their custom software did not work.    But, why would they have been able to even solve one block then?

So the question is:   could it be a software problem?  

Still waiting to hear what Entropy's username on Bitminter is so I can take a look at his mining stats.
KOI.   Work away and let us all know (my guess is you are too lazy to do it).
Information is all visible and available (if you looked instead of shooting your mouth off).   
Do KOI's miners work?   yes.   All of them?   Yes.   How do they know?   Because they have solo mined with them all.    And then, they separated them into accounts by type of miner at pools (to make sure different miners all work).    Why do you think he was so vocal at BTCGuild insisting that someone's miners DID NOT WORK?   



too many grasshoppers, not enough ants
HerbPean
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 938



View Profile
June 19, 2014, 06:32:01 PM
 #6632

I urge this pool to name KOI as President.

That would be all.

Cheesy
Puppet
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 966


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 06:38:06 PM
 #6633

So the question is:   could it be a software problem?  

FWIW, I think both questions are worth pursuing. Maybe there is a software problem somewhere, but if it turns out that its profitable for a dominant entity to carry out such an attack (and without doing any math, I do think it would be), then this is a problem worth solving regardless if we have suffered the consequences already.
flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


www.multipool.us


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:11:50 PM
 #6634

I do not believe in block withholding attacks and I think that people are focusing on the WRONG issue.   The problem that was discovered was the miner did not work correctly (please see below).   Whether it was software (that was easily fixed or hardware which could never be fixed is not known but the owner of the miners said it was a simple software fix).
Also, it should be noted that the most recent example of this attack was apparently not an attack, rather it was probably a software problem - although this should have already been detected during testing on the testnet, so I'm not sure how "unknown" it could have been.

The problem was their software discarding shares that matched 2^32-1 difficulty or better.  Anything UNDER that, they worked fine.  So testnet would not have detected anything wrong.

So, I put it to you all:  
1.  We have someone that has bad luck (lots of people have bad luck runs and there is a 1 in 11 chance of this happening by chance so far).
2.  The person is mining using tons of different hardware (so unless all his clients use the same miner brand and that brand is bad it is not likely the miners)
3.  The person has software that jumps between pools to mine other coins when prices dictate.   Please read the above quote.   SOFTWARE problem.   Their custom software did not work.    But, why would they have been able to even solve one block then?

So the question is:   could it be a software problem?  

Still waiting to hear what Entropy's username on Bitminter is so I can take a look at his mining stats.
KOI.   Work away and let us all know (my guess is you are too lazy to do it).
Information is all visible and available (if you looked instead of shooting your mouth off).   
Do KOI's miners work?   yes.   All of them?   Yes.   How do they know?   Because they have solo mined with them all.    And then, they separated them into accounts by type of miner at pools (to make sure different miners all work).    Why do you think he was so vocal at BTCGuild insisting that someone's miners DID NOT WORK?

You say he's Koi, DrH says he doesn't mine here?

So who's correct?

Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


www.multipool.us


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:18:42 PM
 #6635

You say he's Koi, DrH says he doesn't mine here?
So who's correct?
You misunderstand what people write quite often.   Put the quote in to help the rest of us try to explain to you what was meant.
He is Koi because I own part of Koi so I know.   DrH did not say anything of the sort.
Now bless us with the analysis on Koi.   Remember it took us weeks to move over the machines that we did (but you can figure that out I am sure).   


A long time ago the pool hit some bad luck. There was a similar discussion about how bad luck can never happen unless there are bugs (or block withholding attacks). Entropy decided that since the pool was having bad luck that must mean it is broken and so he left for another pool. He's not carrying any asses, fat or not. Tongue

Sometimes bad luck is just bad luck.

Most people can do simple math but have no understanding whatsoever of probability theory. Listen to what Organofcorti is saying. He is one of the very few people on this forum who does understand it.


Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
Minor Miner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:19:17 PM
 #6636

You say he's Koi, DrH says he doesn't mine here?
So who's correct?
You misunderstand what people write quite often.   Put the quote in to help the rest of us try to explain to you what was meant.
He is Koi because I own part of Koi so I know.   DrH said this?   Please show quote.   He may be confused because we are also at BTCguild, but I doubt that.
Now bless us with the analysis on Koi.   Remember it took us weeks to move over the machines that we did (but you can figure that out I am sure).  

EDIT:   Thank you, I see you included the quote.    DrH, you owe Entropy an apology.   And to clarify, my quote saying I was tired of carrying multipool's fat ass was in reference to his pool share payout, not adam in any way.

too many grasshoppers, not enough ants
DrHaribo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1960


Bitminter.com Operator


View Profile WWW
June 19, 2014, 08:39:17 PM
 #6637

Looks like Entropy has more than one account at the pool. I apologize to Entropy for saying he's not mining here. It was stupid of me to assume he's not mining just because he's not mining with his old account.

I encourage those who called flound1129 a scammer as soon as he hit slightly bad luck to apologize as well. That wasn't a good assumption either.

▶▶▶ Bitminter.com - Your trusted mining pool since 2011.
Minor Miner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 08:54:51 PM
 #6638

Looks like Entropy has more than one account at the pool. I apologize to Entropy for saying he's not mining here. It was stupid of me to assume he's not mining just because he's not mining with his old account.
I encourage those who called flound1129 a scammer as soon as he hit slightly bad luck to apologize as well. That wasn't a good assumption either.
No one has called him a scammer.   I have suggested many reasons for his bad luck though.
Scamming would require knowing.    Freeriding is very different.   
Just PM me when he hits 6 blocks in the next week (that should be about neutral correct?)

too many grasshoppers, not enough ants
flound1129
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798


www.multipool.us


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 09:58:49 PM
 #6639

Looks like Entropy has more than one account at the pool. I apologize to Entropy for saying he's not mining here. It was stupid of me to assume he's not mining just because he's not mining with his old account.
I encourage those who called flound1129 a scammer as soon as he hit slightly bad luck to apologize as well. That wasn't a good assumption either.
No one has called him a scammer.   I have suggested many reasons for his bad luck though.
Scamming would require knowing.    Freeriding is very different.   
Just PM me when he hits 6 blocks in the next week (that should be about neutral correct?)


And expect to hear from me next time Koi hits a dry spell.  Although I expect you'll both be conspicuously absent from the forum if that happens.

Multipool - Always mine the most profitable coin - Scrypt, X11 or SHA-256!
Minor Miner
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 840


View Profile
June 19, 2014, 10:45:05 PM
 #6640

And expect to hear from me next time Koi hits a dry spell.  Although I expect you'll both be conspicuously absent from the forum if that happens.
I can take it and I will still be here, but hopefully it does not happen until we are 2% of the pool. 
Let me know on those stats after you crunch the numbers.   I will be interested to know (maybe you have some reason for me to "hear from you" now).    As you have said, I am a moron that cannot do simple math so help me out here.
Hopefully, everyone will become the neighborhood watchers, so I would encourage you to call out anomalies and let OOC tell you that it is not likely (although his 8X is more than anyone can really stomach from someone over 10% of a pool).   Hopefully, you do not go 15 more days to get to the point where OOC would agree "something is likely strange..."

too many grasshoppers, not enough ants
Pages: « 1 ... 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 [332] 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!