Namecoin attack threat - Please withdraw your Namecoins ASAP

[paraipan]

@Mr Wizard

I think the creator of GeistGeld can readily verify that I have 68 GH/s of my own.

nice to hear that, lots of hashes
thanks for making this security test for all of us, would be nice to have some results after you finish though

[Maged]

As far as believing, we have proven it to the right people. Gavin and others are aware of this exploit but have kept quiet about it.

Very well, I'll defer to them, in this case.

[Maged]

@Mr Wizard

I think the creator of GeistGeld can readily verify that I have 68 GH/s of my own.

nice to hear that, lots of hashes
thanks for making this security test for all of us, would be nice to have some results after you finish though

Glad you like it, he also claims he can do it with as little as 25% of the power.... would seem to me doing it to Bitcoin itself in not that far outside his reach with all the support you all have for these "testers", will that be the next great test, he does need to know the limits after all.  Am I right people?  Ya BTCExpress, just go straight for Bitcoin, that after all is the MOST realistic test, a lot of people here would love to see your data.

This attack is only really possible at over 90% power (which he seems to have), unless he actually found a exploit in the code itself. Personally, I think that he just thinks he found a "design flaw", but we'll see. He'll be able to do this attack with this much power, anyway.

[paraipan]

@Mr Wizard

I think the creator of GeistGeld can readily verify that I have 68 GH/s of my own.

nice to hear that, lots of hashes
thanks for making this security test for all of us, would be nice to have some results after you finish though

Glad you like it, he also claims he can do it with as little as 25% of the power.... would seem to me doing it to Bitcoin itself in not that far outside his reach with all the support you all have for these "testers", will that be the next great test, he does need to know the limits after all.  Am I right people?  Ya BTCExpress, just go straight for Bitcoin, that after all is the MOST realistic test, a lot of people here would love to see your data.

This attack is only really possible at over 90% power (which he seems to have), unless he actually found a exploit in the code itself. Personally, I think that he just thinks he found a "design flaw", but we'll see. He'll be able to do this attack with this much power, anyway.

it is a design flaw Maged  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=43692.msg521772#msg521772

[Maged]

@Mr Wizard

I think the creator of GeistGeld can readily verify that I have 68 GH/s of my own.

nice to hear that, lots of hashes
thanks for making this security test for all of us, would be nice to have some results after you finish though

Glad you like it, he also claims he can do it with as little as 25% of the power.... would seem to me doing it to Bitcoin itself in not that far outside his reach with all the support you all have for these "testers", will that be the next great test, he does need to know the limits after all.  Am I right people?  Ya BTCExpress, just go straight for Bitcoin, that after all is the MOST realistic test, a lot of people here would love to see your data.

This attack is only really possible at over 90% power (which he seems to have), unless he actually found a exploit in the code itself. Personally, I think that he just thinks he found a "design flaw", but we'll see. He'll be able to do this attack with this much power, anyway.

it is a design flaw Maged  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=43692.msg521772#msg521772

You are right about the difficulty issue - that is indeed a serious flaw. But it still doesn't bypass the need for a higher sum-of-difficulty. It'll still be hard to rewrite from block 10000, which is, in my opinion, more of an issue.

[Cosbycoin]

@Mr Wizard

I think the creator of GeistGeld can readily verify that I have 68 GH/s of my own.

nice to hear that, lots of hashes
thanks for making this security test for all of us, would be nice to have some results after you finish though

Glad you like it, he also claims he can do it with as little as 25% of the power.... would seem to me doing it to Bitcoin itself in not that far outside his reach with all the support you all have for these "testers", will that be the next great test, he does need to know the limits after all.  Am I right people?  Ya BTCExpress, just go straight for Bitcoin, that after all is the MOST realistic test, a lot of people here would love to see your data.

This attack is only really possible at over 90% power (which he seems to have), unless he actually found a exploit in the code itself. Personally, I think that he just thinks he found a "design flaw", but we'll see. He'll be able to do this attack with this much power, anyway.

it is a design flaw Maged  https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=43692.msg521772#msg521772

You are right about the difficulty issue - that is indeed a serious flaw. But it still doesn't bypass the need for a higher sum-of-difficulty. It'll still be hard to rewrite from block 10000, which is, in my opinion, more of an issue.

Yesterday I dropped the difficulty of Geist Geld to 0.6 and held it there for 73 minutes while I mined 20,000 blocks without a single orphan. The same flaw exist in NMC and I absoultely will never attack Bitcoin. I have too many put away for that.

Yes we can all count on this never happening given his inconsistent motives and restatements and backpedaling on motives and changing objectives.

[johnj]

Cheers BitXpress.

I think this is great. Though I kinda feel bad for the NMC miners, I think a live test like this is needed sometime down the road - why not now?

If GE or Apple or someone (or the Fed, whoever) drop a couple of million on hardware to try this on Bitcoin before it gets fixed, there is a bigger issue than an alt chain being experimented on.

[Cosbycoin]

Cheers BitXpress.

I think this is great. Though I kinda feel bad for the NMC miners, I think a live test like this is needed sometime down the road - why not now?

If GE or Apple or someone (or the Fed, whoever) drop a couple of million on hardware to try this on Bitcoin before it gets fixed, there is a bigger issue than an alt chain being experimented on.

Point taken. But the messed up thing is that merged mining which would help secure the namecoin network is supposed to take place in about 250 blocks and he is doing this attack in the name of bitcoin/science as a way to test the network to prevent attacks like this. But he doesn't realize that merged mining would remove this flaw. But of course he being a douche thinks he is doing all of us a favor.

[johnj]

Right, umm ya this is very useful! Fixes for this could never happen if you don't maliciously attack a live network people have vested time, effort and money into.  Well said Johnj!  I feel as retarded as you are now!  It feels great!

Edit:

Yeah, I see your sarcasm.  I just disagree with your perspective.

Have a nice day.

[DutchBrat]

Davinci is trying to get hashing power to his pool to help save Namecoins

He's paying miners BTC in exchange for the NMC they mine or you get to keep the NMC, whatever you like. He's paying the BTC out of his own pocket

Check it out ! https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=33612.msg522633#msg522633

It's ready!

I pay just under 20% more than what deepbit will pay help save Namecoins!

Just click PPS check box beside your worker and BOOM you are getting paid btc I keep the NMC however you can get proportional namecoins if you like.

Your shares are updated once a NMC block is found so the more blocks we find the faster you BTC end up in your wallet.

Brat

[sharky112065]

You do realize the only reason BitcoinEXpress and ArtForz are attacking other chains is to cause panic and lower the BTC price on the market. They both have substantial BTC saved up and every time they can get the price lower, they make bank on the upswing when the dust settles. They can say it is to strengthen the Bitcoin network, but I know otherwise. If that was their true goal then test networks would be involved instead of live chains.

[Cosbycoin]

You do realize the only reason BitcoinEXpress and ArtForz are attacking other chains is to cause panic and lower the BTC price on the market. They both have substantial BTC saved up and every time they can get the price lower, they make bank on the upswing when the dust settles. They can say it is to strengthen the Bitcoin network, but I know otherwise. If that was their true goal then test networks would be involved instead of live chains.

+1

[Lolcust]

Well, from personal experience ArtForz  is a very civilized and helpful individual who will gladly help out in tightening stuff up and patching  vulnerabilities.

[Spacy]

Well, from personal experience ArtForz  is a very civilized and helpful individual who will gladly help out in tightening stuff up and patching  vulnerabilities in Bitcoin.

Fixed it for you

[Lolcust]

Well, from personal experience ArtForz  is a very civilized and helpful individual who will gladly help out in tightening stuff up and patching  vulnerabilities in Bitcoin.

Fixed it for you

*Looks at new and improved Geist code*

*Looks at Spacy*

*Looks at new and improved Geist code*

*Looks at Spacy*

*Looks at new and improved Geist code*

*Looks at Spacy*

 

Um, dude...
...I think you're not supposed to smoke your giga-hashes  

[caston]

This place has really gone down hill since IXcoin. It's accelerating to a kind of singularity but one where the man on the street is going the way of the dodo.

I think the next alternate block chain project is going to require licensed mining.

[Cosbycoin]

This place has really gone down hill since IXcoin. It's accelerating to a kind of singularity but one where the man on the street is going the way of the dodo.

I think the next alternate block chain project is going to require licensed mining.

Agreed.

[coinjedi]

I've just approved a bet on the success of the attack:
http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=101

[Cosbycoin]

I've just approved a bet on the success of the attack:
http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=101

Whats the biggest bet you are willing to accept?

Yeah that would make sense bet on the game with patriot vs greenbacks and then make sure you are betting with the head coach of the patriots on who is going to win the game.

lol

[coinjedi]

I've just approved a bet on the success of the attack:
http://betsofbitco.in/item?id=101

Whats the biggest bet you are willing to accept?

You can bet ANY amount you want. But note that this is pooled betting (or technically parimutuel betting), you can only win as much as your challengers want to bet. Current total bet amounts are in green and red bubbles. You can read more on our help page.