DDos sources is GHash.IO and associates

[asically]

Now you know.

[1715504189]

1715504189

[1715504189]

1715504189

[Trongersoll]

Now you know.

This is a libelist statement, show us the proof.

[Zeek_W]

I too am interested how you came across this

[xstr8guy]

Wasn't GHash.io a victim of this attack too?   

[BurtW]

They must have attacked themselves to cover their tracks.

[eleuthria]

Wasn't GHash.io a victim of this attack too?   

Were they?  They were solving a *ton* of blocks during the attacks.  My understanding is their website went down when all of Cloudflare had a major outage, but the website is just a frontend.

[xstr8guy]

Wasn't GHash.io a victim of this attack too?   

Were they?  They were solving a *ton* of blocks during the attacks.  My understanding is their website went down when all of Cloudflare had a major outage, but the website is just a frontend.

I read a few here-say posts that said they were being attacked.  But I don't know if it was fact.

So, is there possibly some truth to this rumor, Eleuthria?

[eleuthria]

Wasn't GHash.io a victim of this attack too?  

Were they?  They were solving a *ton* of blocks during the attacks.  My understanding is their website went down when all of Cloudflare had a major outage, but the website is just a frontend.

I read a few here-say posts that said they were being attacked.  But I don't know if it was fact.

So, is there possibly some truth to this rumor, Eleuthria?

There's a little motive, especially for large mining entities, but nothing that points to any culprit.  Innocent until proven guilty, and it's impossible to establish guilt from a DDoS when nobody is trying to take credit/gloating.  Knocking off the largest pool for 24 hours really has minimal impact on difficulty though due to failover pools, so the real motive would be someone that actually *gains* something out of it (another pool).  But in all likelihood, it was neither.

[HellDiverUK]

Now you know.

We know something for sure, and it isn't that GHash.io was the source of the DDoS. 

[klondike_bar]

Wasn't GHash.io a victim of this attack too?   

Were they?  They were solving a *ton* of blocks during the attacks.  My understanding is their website went down when all of Cloudflare had a major outage, but the website is just a frontend.

I read a few here-say posts that said they were being attacked.  But I don't know if it was fact.

So, is there possibly some truth to this rumor, Eleuthria?

the ghash.io hosted stuff went down for an hour or so, and my own equipment using the pool went down for about 2-3 hours. So yeah, seems kind of silly to go pointing fingers at the kid who [also] fell off the playground.

[fattypig]

  How do you know, maybe you are the real hacker

Proof it please !!!

[Chronikka]

How do you know, maybe you are the real hacker

Proof it please !!!

I'm sorry but does it matter? The attack is over. If it turns out ghash.io was behind the attack what would any of you do? nothing. To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

[os2sam]

To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

Good thing the attack has decreased BTC Guilds overall hashrate.

Too bad your *opinion* doesn't quite square with reality.

[Chronikka]

To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

Good thing the attack has decreased BTC Guilds overall hashrate.

Too bad your *opinion* doesn't quite square with reality.

Sorry maybe you should read my opinion again. clearly you missed it

[os2sam]

To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

Good thing the attack has decreased BTC Guilds overall hashrate.

Too bad your *opinion* doesn't quite square with reality.

Sorry maybe you should read my opinion again. clearly you missed it

I don't think so.  You stated that DDoS'ing BTC Guild was a good thing because you are of the opinion it's hash rate was too high.  The reality is BTC Guild hash rate increased dramatically during the DDoS.

[Chronikka]

To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

Good thing the attack has decreased BTC Guilds overall hashrate.

Too bad your *opinion* doesn't quite square with reality.

Sorry maybe you should read my opinion again. clearly you missed it

I don't think so.  You stated that DDoS'ing BTC Guild was a good thing because you are of the opinion it's hash rate was too high.  The reality is BTC Guild hash rate increased dramatically during the DDoS.

And the attack is now over. Hash rate is now down at btcguild in terms of its percentage on the network. Like I said...read it again.

[os2sam]

To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

Good thing the attack has decreased BTC Guilds overall hashrate.

Too bad your *opinion* doesn't quite square with reality.

Sorry maybe you should read my opinion again. clearly you missed it

I don't think so.  You stated that DDoS'ing BTC Guild was a good thing because you are of the opinion it's hash rate was too high.  The reality is BTC Guild hash rate increased dramatically during the DDoS.

And the attack is now over. Hash rate is now down at btcguild in terms of its percentage on the network. Like I said...read it again.

OK, lets read it again.

BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

So your saying now that BTC Guild's portion "of the network hashing power" is just peachy?

At any rate BTC Guild hash rate is accountable to it's miners so therefore much safer for the network.  These other hashing entities are unaccountable to anyone so they can do whatever they want and they are growing very fast.  So if BTC Guild is now a smaller percentage of the network I'm not so sure that's a good thing overall as reputable pools are not taking up that slack.

[Chronikka]

Reputable? Who cares if its reputable? All it takes is one disgruntled employee or a dedicated hacker to take control of the pool and do whatever they want with that power. Sorry but no pool should have 40% of the network hash power which btcguild has had in recent months. That is more dangerous than a few small pools being "not reputable"

[Trongersoll]

Reputable? Who cares if its reputable? All it takes is one disgruntled employee or a dedicated hacker to take control of the pool and do whatever they want with that power. Sorry but no pool should have 40% of the network hash power which btcguild has had in recent months. That is more dangerous than a few small pools being "not reputable"

Get real, most of the pools are one man operations. No employees to get disgruntled. Also, no matter what a hacker or anyone else did, it would be countered rather quickly. Everyone would just stop mining for that pool. Instant shutdown. If BTCguild's hashrate is down now as compared to others, it is because the others grew. I doubt that the attack had anything to do with the current size of the pool relative to other mining concerns.

[eleuthria]

Reputable? Who cares if its reputable? All it takes is one disgruntled employee or a dedicated hacker to take control of the pool and do whatever they want with that power. Sorry but no pool should have 40% of the network hash power which btcguild has had in recent months. That is more dangerous than a few small pools being "not reputable"

Except BTC Guild hasn't been 40% for roughly 6 months.  Maybe you should learn more about the actual network hashrate distribution instead of quoting shit from reddit/forums from blockchain.info's 24-hour charts.  BTC Guild was only ONCE above 40%, and that was entirely due to ASICMINER not being setup for solo mining when they first started up.

[cowandtea]

How do you know, maybe you are the real hacker

Proof it please !!!

I'm sorry but does it matter? The attack is over. If it turns out ghash.io was behind the attack what would any of you do? nothing. To be quite frank the attack was a plus for the network. BTCguild had far too much of the network hashing power in my opinion

It matters, because cex.io is backed by ghash.io. I wouldn't put any more BTC into it then.

[Chronikka]

Reputable? Who cares if its reputable? All it takes is one disgruntled employee or a dedicated hacker to take control of the pool and do whatever they want with that power. Sorry but no pool should have 40% of the network hash power which btcguild has had in recent months. That is more dangerous than a few small pools being "not reputable"

Except BTC Guild hasn't been 40% for roughly 6 months.  Maybe you should learn more about the actual network hashrate distribution instead of quoting shit from reddit/forums from blockchain.info's 24-hour charts.  BTC Guild was only ONCE above 40%, and that was entirely due to ASICMINER not being setup for solo mining when they first started up.

Never said you sustained 40% of the network hash rate I just said you had it. An attacker doesn't need to sustain that forever just long enough to do whatever he needs to do. I like Btcguild and I think eleuthria has done great things over there. But having so much of the network's hash power (and hence it's security) at one pool is not a good idea.

[eleuthria]

Reputable? Who cares if its reputable? All it takes is one disgruntled employee or a dedicated hacker to take control of the pool and do whatever they want with that power. Sorry but no pool should have 40% of the network hash power which btcguild has had in recent months. That is more dangerous than a few small pools being "not reputable"

Except BTC Guild hasn't been 40% for roughly 6 months.  Maybe you should learn more about the actual network hashrate distribution instead of quoting shit from reddit/forums from blockchain.info's 24-hour charts.  BTC Guild was only ONCE above 40%, and that was entirely due to ASICMINER not being setup for solo mining when they first started up.

Never said you sustained 40% of the network hash rate I just said you had it. An attacker doesn't need to sustain that forever just long enough to do whatever he needs to do. I like Btcguild and I think eleuthria has done great things over there. But having so much of the network's hash power (and hence it's security) at one pool is not a good idea.

I didn't "have it" unless you're talking about 6 months ago.  BTC Guild hasn't been above 32% of network hash rate since ASICMINER left. Hell, at this point referring to any public pool as a threat is losing sight of the larger picture.  GHash.IO will pretty soon be the largest amount of network hash rate (now at 440TH/s, a massive jump in almost no time at all).  ASICMINER is supposed to be putting up 500TH/s in the next 2 months as well.  KnC is starting their own private pool as well.  In about 3-6 months, you're probably looking at all the public pools *combined* not even representing 40% of the network.

[HellDiverUK]

Reputable? Who cares if its reputable? All it takes is one disgruntled employee or a dedicated hacker to take control of the pool and do whatever they want with that power. Sorry but no pool should have 40% of the network hash power which btcguild has had in recent months. That is more dangerous than a few small pools being "not reputable"

Except BTC Guild hasn't been 40% for roughly 6 months.  Maybe you should learn more about the actual network hashrate distribution instead of quoting shit from reddit/forums from blockchain.info's 24-hour charts.  BTC Guild was only ONCE above 40%, and that was entirely due to ASICMINER not being setup for solo mining when they first started up.

Never said you sustained 40% of the network hash rate I just said you had it. An attacker doesn't need to sustain that forever just long enough to do whatever he needs to do. I like Btcguild and I think eleuthria has done great things over there. But having so much of the network's hash power (and hence it's security) at one pool is not a good idea.

Just admit you were wrong, dumbass.  You're just digging yourself deeper in to the hole you've made for yourself.

[Leehoya]

I guess it isnt ghash.io. Maybe just some raging kid and pointed his/her botnet to the pools.

[bee7]

GHash.IO will pretty soon be the largest amount of network hash rate (now at 440TH/s, a massive jump in almost no time at all).

I am not so sure. The other vendors (KnC, e.t.c.) are already started shipment or are about to start. I think that the most part of these new devices will be spread over other pools/solo mining.

I am in no way associated with ghash.io apart from having 110Gh (120Gh as announced) bitfury device that is now connected to this pool. The pool have been DDoS'ed at the same time as other pools. For example, at some moment it lost approximately %50 of hashing power for more than three hours. I don't think that this was done intentionally to 'hide' the source of attack as the profits you could gain this way being a pool operator are close to zero.

I think that the DDoS was made by some people wishing to even more escalate the panic on the markets that was caused by the SR shutdown.

[vm1990]

i blame the US government.....

[Fiyasko]

PROOF OR STFU WITH THE F.U.D!

[Paladin69]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

[pyra-proxy]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

private bitfury chip based mining pool right?  Bitfury is shipping chips now so they are bringing, from what I understand, a significant amount of hash rate online as their orders arrive.

[bee7]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

private bitfury chip based mining pool right?  Bitfury is shipping chips now so they are bringing, from what I understand, a significant amount of hash rate online as their orders arrive.

Private? Not exactly. Every Metabank's client received the credentials to access this pool with a miner unit (Metabank is a company that built the russian version of miner with Bitfury chips). I believe that FAN (Ukraine) also does the same. I have no idea if punin does. Also when you buy a hash power from the cex.io you get an account at ghash.io. As an option, you may contact this pool admin and ask for an account (I have no idea what reasons he has to accept or reject a request).

As for hash power growth speed, the agreement between Bitfury and foundry is 25 wafers a month AFAIK (this is  approximately 270Th per batch). However, due to different spontaneous delays in the whole production chain this not achievable, but still the growth is really high

[juhakall]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

private bitfury chip based mining pool right?  Bitfury is shipping chips now so they are bringing, from what I understand, a significant amount of hash rate online as their orders arrive.

Private? Not exactly. Every Metabank's client received the credentials to access this pool with a miner unit (Metabank is a company that built the russian version of miner with Bitfury chips). I believe that FAN (Ukraine) also does the same. I have no idea if punin does. Also when you buy a hash power from the cex.io you get an account at ghash.io. As an option, you may contact this pool admin and ask for an account (I have no idea what reasons he has to accept or reject a request).

As for hash power growth speed, the agreement between Bitfury and foundry is 25 wafers a month AFAIK (this is  approximately 270Th per batch). However, due to different spontaneous delays in the whole production chain this not achievable, but still the growth is really high

I'm pretty sure you can just sign up to cex.io and forget buying hashpower entirely. The same account credentials will work on ghash.io.

[bee7]

I'm pretty sure you can just sign up to cex.io and forget buying hashpower entirely. The same account credentials will work on ghash.io.

May be. I did not checked.

[tripppn]

i blame the US government.....

Yup!

[wknight]

Blame Canada

because south park says so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOR38552MJA

[Fiyasko]

Blame Canada

because south park says so

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOR38552MJA

blame wknight, he's been renting ddos power from tor sites to try and drop the total network hashrate to make it easier for his secret mining pool of compromised computers to earn him more coins

It's a shame that so many american's like to makeup bullshit to sling at others while they ignore their own countries downfalls

Doesn't feel so good to listen to bullshit thats aimed towards your general direction now does it?

[MasterX]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

its them:

[eleuthria]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

its them:

cex.io doesn't make ghash.io grow.  They're the same company.  They already own that hashrate.

[MasterX]

This ghash.io keeps growing at an alarming rate.  Who are they?

its them:

cex.io doesn't make ghash.io grow.  They're the same company.  They already own that hashrate.

i know its the same company, thats what/why i sayed.
there probably adding up hashing power when available.

[001sonkit]

This post needs a bump