[1050 TH] BitMinter.com [1% PPLNS,Pays TxFees +MergedMining,Stratum,GBT,vardiff]

[cenicsoft]

Was there a reason we switched pools to bitminter? I don't really mind just curious. I went back 5 pages or so and just seen talk of no blocks. So I thought I would just go ahead and ask.

Steve

Asked and answered here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167635.msg7265722#msg7265722

Adam, you run a good pool at Multipool.  I've used it to mine various coins.  Keep up the good work.  Wasn't sure at first if you were the official Multipool when I saw you show up at Bitminter.

The concern that everyone has is with that much hash, you should be solving a block every couple of days.  Is this just a run of bad luck or some other problem?  Were your blocks solved at Ghash on par with what the average of your hash rate should be solving?

[MoreBloodWine]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Was there a reason we switched pools to bitminter? I don't really mind just curious. I went back 5 pages or so and just seen talk of no blocks. So I thought I would just go ahead and ask.

Steve

Asked and answered here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167635.msg7265722#msg7265722

Adam, you run a good pool at Multipool.  I've used it to mine various coins.  Keep up the good work.  Wasn't sure at first if you were the official Multipool when I saw you show up at Bitminter.

The concern that everyone has is with that much hash, you should be solving a block every couple of days.  Is this just a run of bad luck or some other problem?  Were your blocks solved at Ghash on par with what the average of your hash rate should be solving?

[flound1129]

Was there a reason we switched pools to bitminter? I don't really mind just curious. I went back 5 pages or so and just seen talk of no blocks. So I thought I would just go ahead and ask.

Steve

Asked and answered here:  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167635.msg7265722#msg7265722

Adam, you run a good pool at Multipool.  I've used it to mine various coins.  Keep up the good work.  Wasn't sure at first if you were the official Multipool when I saw you show up at Bitminter.

The concern that everyone has is with that much hash, you should be solving a block every couple of days.  Is this just a run of bad luck or some other problem?  Were your blocks solved at Ghash on par with what the average of your hash rate should be solving?

As I stated before, we don't solve Bitcoin blocks.  For that coin, we merely proxy stratum connections directly to the upstream pool (Currently Bitminter).  Mining at Multipool when we're on BTC is exactly the same as mining directly at Bitminter, other than having your worker name changed to ours and your shares recorded in our database for payouts.

If one of our miners happens to solve a block, the share is sent upstream just like every other share.  We've already found a Bitcoin block and multiple Namecoin blocks, which proves the software is working as designed.The upstream pool is then responsible for assembling the block and submitting it to the network.  We've already found a Bitcoin block for Bitminter and multiple Namecoin blocks, which proves the software is working as designed.  I do not have statistics on what blocks were found by us when we were proxying to ghash, as they do not publish that information.

10 days is way too short of a period for anyone to be calling 'bad luck' on a group of users with ~200TH.  If you want something to compare with, head over and take a look at https://eclipsemc.com/block_stats.php.  They have over 3x our average hashrate on Bitminter and have several times recently gone 2-3 days without finding a block.

[flound1129]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

[organofcorti]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

I think he just meant that btc multipool is a proxy rather than a block solving pool.

[MoreBloodWine]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

I think he just meant that btc multipool is a proxy rather than a block solving pool.

Pretty much so the way he replied was uncalled for when I haven't said anything about him until now.

[philipma1957]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

I think he just meant that btc multipool is a proxy rather than a block solving pool.

Question for you.   lets say the 'bad luck attacker' is real  as some say it is.  (Note not saying it is multi pool)   I have racked my brains on prevention ideas and I am still stuck with a solo fork for each big pool as the only way to stop him ,her ,it  dead in his tracks.

 So Any ideas on stopping 'bad luck attackers'?  other then my solo fork idea.

 I have a variation on this idea, but it involves Some kind of  auto fork hopping within a pool. 

 10 percent of a pool is auto jumped to a solo fork  and stays in place to see if it has a winner. once that 10 percent has a solo block those miners are switched back to merged mining.   then a second 10 percent is auto switched   until the whole pool has been done.     It mitigates the damage of a bad luck attack some what and still allows for  merged most of the time.

[organofcorti]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

I think he just meant that btc multipool is a proxy rather than a block solving pool.

Question for you.   lets say the 'bad luck attacker' is real  as some say it is.  (Note not saying it is multi pool)   I have racked my brains on prevention ideas and I am still stuck with a solo fork for each big pool as the only way to stop him ,her ,it  dead in his tracks.

 So Any ideas on stopping 'bad luck attackers'?  other then my solo fork idea

I still don't understand what you mean by a 'solo fork'?

[flound1129]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

I think he just meant that btc multipool is a proxy rather than a block solving pool.

Question for you.   lets say the 'bad luck attacker' is real  as some say it is.  (Note not saying it is multi pool)   I have racked my brains on prevention ideas and I am still stuck with a solo fork for each big pool as the only way to stop him ,her ,it  dead in his tracks.

 So Any ideas on stopping 'bad luck attackers'?  other then my solo fork idea

Bad luck isn't an attack, it's just bad luck.  While it would be great if you could keep 'people with bad luck', however you define that, off your pool, and only allow the 'good luck' people on, that would kinda defeat the purpose of pooling in the first place.

[philipma1957]

Tehnically he's not a pool / pool operator but he does seem to be trying to keep everyone happy with his "service".

Technically, I run pools for 37 different cryptocurrencies and 4 profit-switching ports.

I see your ass cheeks moving but only smoke is coming out.

I think he just meant that btc multipool is a proxy rather than a block solving pool.

Question for you.   lets say the 'bad luck attacker' is real  as some say it is.  (Note not saying it is multi pool)   I have racked my brains on prevention ideas and I am still stuck with a solo fork for each big pool as the only way to stop him ,her ,it  dead in his tracks.

 So Any ideas on stopping 'bad luck attackers'?  other then my solo fork idea

I still don't understand what you mean by a 'solo fork'?

  okay   all this has been started by the idea that  btcguild and eligus where mined with bad gear causing terrible luck.

So when you go to a merged pool like bit minter, btcguild, eligus   you are told enter an address such as

stratum+tcp://mint.bitminter.com:3333 for stratum

http://mint.bitminter.com:8332 for (Gbt or Getwork)


how about

stratum+tcp://mint.bitminter.com:9999      for solo mining  along with a real btc address that you really control for payment.

this is what I mean by solo fork  . I could call it a solo server if you want.

[organofcorti]

I still don't understand what you mean by a 'solo fork'?

 okay   all this has been started by the idea that  btcguild and eligus where mined with bad gear causing terrible luck.

So when you go to a merged pool like bit minter, btcguild, eligus   you are told enter an address such as

stratum+tcp://mint.bitminter.com:3333 for stratum

http://mint.bitminter.com:8332 for (Gbt or Getwork)


how about

stratum+tcp://mint.bitminter.com:9999      for solo mining  along with a real btc address that you really control for payment.

this is what I mean by solo fork  . I could call it a solo server if you want.

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

[MoreBloodWine]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

[organofcorti]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

If you know they're a bad actor, why not just block them?

[MoreBloodWine]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

If you know they're a bad actor, why not just block them?

Again I could be wrong as I'm just assuming here, but it could be more of a long game. Sure it would mess with current people and ya, why not just block them. But again, if I am right it would also serve to protect the future so you wouldnt have to hunt, find and block each and every person that tries to be naughty.

[organofcorti]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

If you know they're a bad actor, why not just block them?

Again I could be wrong as I'm just assuming here, but it could be more of a long game. Sure it would mess with current people and ya, why not just block them. But again, if I am right it would also serve to protect the future so you wouldnt have to hunt, find and block each and every person that tries to be naughty.

Sorry, that's beyond me. I'd just block 'em.

Anyway, what's to stop them changing accounts and IP addresses? What's the detection heuristic?

[flound1129]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

If you know they're a bad actor, why not just block them?

Again I could be wrong as I'm just assuming here, but it could be more of a long game. Sure it would mess with current people and ya, why not just block them. But again, if I am right it would also serve to protect the future so you wouldnt have to hunt, find and block each and every person that tries to be naughty.

If you are paying someone for their shares, it doesn't really matter where their hash is being directed (solo instances or whatever.)  If you're not paying them, they're probably going to leave.  So either way it'd be better to save everyone some time and just block them.

[MoreBloodWine]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

If you know they're a bad actor, why not just block them?

Again I could be wrong as I'm just assuming here, but it could be more of a long game. Sure it would mess with current people and ya, why not just block them. But again, if I am right it would also serve to protect the future so you wouldnt have to hunt, find and block each and every person that tries to be naughty.

Sorry, that's beyond me. I'd just block 'em.

Anyway, what's to stop them changing accounts and IP addresses? What's the detection heuristic?

Phillip would better to answer this as well as whether my assumptions are close to anything since I was just guessing at everything.

[philipma1957]

So what you mean is you want to solo mine, but do it through a pool? Why not solo mine yourself? I'm sure you could get someone to set it up for you. Better still, why not p2pool? Your variance will be much less than that of solomining.

I could be wrong but I think phillips idea is to force people in to a solo mine situation when said person tries to connect with unfaithful gear which is putting it nicely. Not that he wants to solo mine which would just be nuts.

If you know they're a bad actor, why not just block them?

Again I could be wrong as I'm just assuming here, but it could be more of a long game. Sure it would mess with current people and ya, why not just block them. But again, if I am right it would also serve to protect the future so you wouldnt have to hunt, find and block each and every person that tries to be naughty.

Sorry, that's beyond me. I'd just block 'em.

Anyway, what's to stop them changing accounts and IP addresses? What's the detection heuristic?

Phillip would better to answer this as well as whether my assumptions are close to anything since I was just guessing at everything.

You are close.  

 First  if I decide to solo mine it is costly as I would need to run a server for little old me.  

  Second   The idea that medium pools can be attacked and their luck trashed seems to be a truth. Not paranoia .

Third   I don't like the idea that  this can be done to pools .

Fourth  So far no one has said they can easily  block this.   Switching ip's and accounts seem to make the attacker very tough to stop.

Fifth    so far  the solo mining option seems to be the only way to fully prevent this type of attack.  

Sixth  solo to merged auto switching  may help

Seventh  I would like other ideas on how to stop a 'bad luck attack' done by defective software.

Eighth the  problem  I have is  how do you block a bad gear hasher  if he switches around accounts.  You won't detect he is bad until he hurt you.  a  set of 4x 25th miners   is 100 th     run it at bitminter for  3 days and switch out to the next set of 5 x 20 th  miners so on and so forth.  Do this 30 days in a row and bit minter has  about a 10% luck drop.

Miners then jump to a bigger pool.  bit minter is damaged.   


 This is a real issue for small and medium pools only really big pools can tough this out since the attack is more expensive to do against a really big pool.  If you want to attack btcguild you need to use  at least 1200th  since btcguild has 12000th   more costly to attack them then bitminter.  Attacking cex.io would need more then 4000th    just too costly.

I don't see where my theory is wrong.  I rather be wrong.

 p2p does not stop the  problem  in fact they are more attackable then bit minter since they are under 1000th.  it costs less to attack them.

So asking everyone to solo mine and run their own server   makes mining worse due to so much extra power used.  But it is late I am tired so I am signing off for the night.

 I am looking for ideas to stop the danger that seems to exist here. Since two very big pools say this did occur to them to the tune of 400 + 200 coins.

[theweiss]

I'm still failing to see the benefit to the attacker?  Other than them making money on bad equipment that wouldn't otherwise make any money.  Even if the solved blocks aren't being counted, they are still paying for the power.

Also, I think everyone is jumping off of Ghash because they almost hit the fabled 51% mark and no one wants to have hashing power that consolidated.  See article below.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2364000/bitcoin-price-dips-as-backers-fear-mining-monopoly.html

[flound1129]

I'm still failing to see the benefit to the attacker?  Other than them making money on bad equipment that wouldn't otherwise make any money.  Even if the solved blocks aren't being counted, they are still paying for the power.

Also, I think everyone is jumping off of Ghash because they almost hit the fabled 51% mark and no one wants to have hashing power that consolidated.  See article below.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2364000/bitcoin-price-dips-as-backers-fear-mining-monopoly.html

Block withholding attacks have been discussed quite extensively.  

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1338/how-is-block-solution-withholding-a-threat-to-mining-pools

The consensus is that such attacks are likely to remain rare and generally insignificant. The payout for the attack is simply too small and it's not an effective way to bankrupt a pool or get miners to desert a pool unless it's a particularly small pool, in which case there's generally no point.