Bitcoin Forum
December 10, 2016, 03:23:42 AM *
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 2 [3]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Possible 51% Attack on fairbrix (fbx)  (Read 4316 times)
superfastkyle
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 437


View Profile
October 04, 2011, 09:09:54 PM
 #41


I'll say that again. A known thief has most of the FBX in existence and most of the hashing power too. That is plenty to control markets (if one is ever created for FBX) and mess with the network. If these new coins were created because Lolcust might do something wrong, how can we support them when we KNOW that something worse has already happened?

This made me laugh. Right now if the reported 1600 blocks "stolen" in the attack is true that is only 26% of the coins in existence now.... Lolcust has over 95% of tenebrix
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Lolcust
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


Hillariously voracious


View Profile
October 04, 2011, 09:20:23 PM
 #42


I'll say that again. A known thief has most of the FBX in existence and most of the hashing power too. That is plenty to control markets (if one is ever created for FBX) and mess with the network. If these new coins were created because Lolcust might do something wrong, how can we support them when we KNOW that something worse has already happened?

This made me laugh. Right now if the reported 1600 blocks "stolen" in the attack is true that is only 26% of the coins in existence now.... Lolcust has over 95% of tenebrix

But I didn't steal them from some third party - feel the difference  (since TBX has no upper limit on coin mining, you can't even say I squatted them from future generations of minerdom Cheesy)

Geist Geld, the experimental cryptocurrency, is ready for yet another SolidCoin collapse Wink

Feed the Lolcust!
NMC: N6YQFkH9Gn9CTm4mpGwuLB5zLzqWTWFw67
BTC: 15F8xbgRBA1XZ4hmtdFDUasroa2A5rYg8M
GEG: gK5Lx6ypWgr69Gw9yGzE6dsA7kcuCRZRK
freequant
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700


View Profile
October 05, 2011, 09:24:06 AM
 #43

Why are you all considering that forerunning the chain and trigger a reorg = stealing?
It is allowed by the protocol, therefore it is legit.
It happens sometime at a small scale: when two miners find a block at the same time, but one gets a first confirmation quicker, would that be stealing if the miner who is behind catches up and orphans the blocks of the first miner? Why should he resign if protocol allows him to fight back and he knows he has got enough hash power to do that? Tuning his client to continue on the same chain no matter what is a rational strategy knowing that his chain will be the longest at some point in the future.   
Now what if it takes him two blocks to catch up?
What if it takes him three? ten? one thousand?
When does it become stealing?

Let's face it : attacking or locked-mining the same chain when one knows that he has more power is a valid and profitable mining strategy, so it is bound to happen over and over again until it is ruled out by the protocol.
Matoking
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 352

Firstbits: 1m8xa


View Profile WWW
October 05, 2011, 11:02:19 AM
 #44

BitcoinEXpress admitted to doing the attack here :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=45667.msg558154#msg558154

Makes me wonder if he does anything else than attack alternate block chains. Roll Eyes

BTC : 1CcpmVDLvR7DgA5deFGScoNhiEtiJnh6H4 - LTC : LYTnoXAHNsemMB2jhCSi1znQqnfupdRkSy
Bitcoin-otc
BitBin - earn bitcoins with your pastes!
Bobnova
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 210


View Profile
October 05, 2011, 01:58:58 PM
 #45

He certainly claimed to have done it.
That doesn't mean he did, though.

BTC:  1AURXf66t7pw65NwRiKukwPq1hLSiYLqbP
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 05, 2011, 04:41:27 PM
 #46

BitcoinEXpress admitted to doing the attack here :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=45667.msg558154#msg558154

Makes me wonder if he does anything else than attack alternate block chains. Roll Eyes

Everybody knows he is an idiot. He attacks Namecoin then SC then Fairbrix BUT why not Tenecrapix !? Because he is artforz which is also known as lolcust and they have interest to not attack tenecrapix !!!

Seriously, somebody should give crapple a call and bait this vandal out.
EskimoBob
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


Quality Printing Services by Federal Reserve Bank


View Profile
October 05, 2011, 05:10:03 PM
 #47

BitcoinEXpress admitted to doing the attack here :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=45667.msg558154#msg558154

Makes me wonder if he does anything else than attack alternate block chains. Roll Eyes

Everybody knows he is an idiot. He attacks Namecoin then SC then Fairbrix BUT why not Tenecrapix !? Because he is artforz which is also known as lolcust and they have interest to not attack tenecrapix !!!

Seriously, somebody should give crapple a call and bait this vandal out.

No problem, we can start over. You know what, but this little ugly turd of man it is going to be a loser for rest of his shitty life.
He can prance around here and do attacks left and right, but nothing changes. In real life, the one that actually matters, hes is still a human turd.

While reading what I wrote, use the most friendliest and relaxing voice in your head.
BTW, Things in BTC bubble universes are getting ugly....
bulanula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518



View Profile
October 05, 2011, 05:22:23 PM
 #48

BitcoinEXpress admitted to doing the attack here :
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=45667.msg558154#msg558154

Makes me wonder if he does anything else than attack alternate block chains. Roll Eyes

Everybody knows he is an idiot. He attacks Namecoin then SC then Fairbrix BUT why not Tenecrapix !? Because he is artforz which is also known as lolcust and they have interest to not attack tenecrapix !!!

Seriously, somebody should give crapple a call and bait this vandal out.

No problem, we can start over. You know what, but this little ugly turd of man it is going to be a loser for rest of his shitty life.
He can prance around here and do attacks left and right, but nothing changes. In real life, the one that actually matters, hes is still a human turd.


Well put. He is a disgraceful and pathetic moron. Why not attack Tenecrapix too, mr apple employee !?
dust
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 840



View Profile WWW
October 05, 2011, 06:16:03 PM
 #49

Why are you all considering that forerunning the chain and trigger a reorg = stealing?
It is allowed by the protocol, therefore it is legit.
It happens sometime at a small scale: when two miners find a block at the same time, but one gets a first confirmation quicker, would that be stealing if the miner who is behind catches up and orphans the blocks of the first miner? Why should he resign if protocol allows him to fight back and he knows he has got enough hash power to do that? Tuning his client to continue on the same chain no matter what is a rational strategy knowing that his chain will be the longest at some point in the future.   
Now what if it takes him two blocks to catch up?
What if it takes him three? ten? one thousand?
When does it become stealing?

Let's face it : attacking or locked-mining the same chain when one knows that he has more power is a valid and profitable mining strategy, so it is bound to happen over and over again until it is ruled out by the protocol.
It is stealing because it was done with malicious intent.  Small reorgs caused by honest miners are neither intentional nor malicious. 

Cryptocoin Mining Info | OTC | PGP | Twitter | freenode: dust-otc | BTC: 1F6fV4U2xnpAuKtmQD6BWpK3EuRosKzF8U
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
October 06, 2011, 04:10:47 PM
 #50


I'll say that again. A known thief has most of the FBX in existence and most of the hashing power too. That is plenty to control markets (if one is ever created for FBX) and mess with the network. If these new coins were created because Lolcust might do something wrong, how can we support them when we KNOW that something worse has already happened?

This made me laugh. Right now if the reported 1600 blocks "stolen" in the attack is true that is only 26% of the coins in existence now.... Lolcust has over 95% of tenebrix

and most the remaining 5% of tenebrix are probably also concentrated in a few hands. bitcoinexpress, art and a couple more

I wonder how long it will take until someone will hack the tbx faucet...     Tongue

blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
Lolcust
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


Hillariously voracious


View Profile
October 06, 2011, 06:41:50 PM
 #51


I'll say that again. A known thief has most of the FBX in existence and most of the hashing power too. That is plenty to control markets (if one is ever created for FBX) and mess with the network. If these new coins were created because Lolcust might do something wrong, how can we support them when we KNOW that something worse has already happened?

This made me laugh. Right now if the reported 1600 blocks "stolen" in the attack is true that is only 26% of the coins in existence now.... Lolcust has over 95% of tenebrix

and most the remaining 5% of tenebrix are probably also concentrated in a few hands. bitcoinexpress, art and a couple more

I wonder how long it will take until someone will hack the tbx faucet...     Tongue

1) ya know, there is no such thing as "remaining 5% of tenebrix" since there is no such thing as tenebrix upper limit. Or rather, there is  -136 billions, give or take something.

I'll leave it up to you to calculate how much of "total possible TBX I've squatted.

2) hacking tenebrix faucet's wallet will give you 500 TBX at most - the whole point of fueling it in batches of 500 is to make it less lucrative target for break-ins

3) I've just noticed that your site mildly implies that efficient FPGA implementations of TBX are likely. This is not true, see "scaling questions" thread.

Geist Geld, the experimental cryptocurrency, is ready for yet another SolidCoin collapse Wink

Feed the Lolcust!
NMC: N6YQFkH9Gn9CTm4mpGwuLB5zLzqWTWFw67
BTC: 15F8xbgRBA1XZ4hmtdFDUasroa2A5rYg8M
GEG: gK5Lx6ypWgr69Gw9yGzE6dsA7kcuCRZRK
BitcoinPorn
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 560


Posts: 69


View Profile WWW
October 06, 2011, 08:47:51 PM
 #52

Everybody knows he is an idiot. He attacks Namecoin then SC then Fairbrix BUT why not Tenecrapix !? Because he is artforz which is also known as lolcust and they have interest to not attack tenecrapix !!!

I see the Art as Lolcust, but then BitcoinXpress too.   I don't know.

Lolcust
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112


Hillariously voracious


View Profile
October 06, 2011, 11:40:46 PM
 #53

I am Satoshi.

I thought it's quite obvious, really.

Geist Geld, the experimental cryptocurrency, is ready for yet another SolidCoin collapse Wink

Feed the Lolcust!
NMC: N6YQFkH9Gn9CTm4mpGwuLB5zLzqWTWFw67
BTC: 15F8xbgRBA1XZ4hmtdFDUasroa2A5rYg8M
GEG: gK5Lx6ypWgr69Gw9yGzE6dsA7kcuCRZRK
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
October 07, 2011, 02:48:00 PM
 #54


I'll say that again. A known thief has most of the FBX in existence and most of the hashing power too. That is plenty to control markets (if one is ever created for FBX) and mess with the network. If these new coins were created because Lolcust might do something wrong, how can we support them when we KNOW that something worse has already happened?

This made me laugh. Right now if the reported 1600 blocks "stolen" in the attack is true that is only 26% of the coins in existence now.... Lolcust has over 95% of tenebrix

and most the remaining 5% of tenebrix are probably also concentrated in a few hands. bitcoinexpress, art and a couple more

I wonder how long it will take until someone will hack the tbx faucet...     Tongue

1) ya know, there is no such thing as "remaining 5% of tenebrix" since there is no such thing as tenebrix upper limit. Or rather, there is  -136 billions, give or take something.

I'll leave it up to you to calculate how much of "total possible TBX I've squatted.

2) hacking tenebrix faucet's wallet will give you 500 TBX at most - the whole point of fueling it in batches of 500 is to make it less lucrative target for break-ins

3) I've just noticed that your site mildly implies that efficient FPGA implementations of TBX are likely. This is not true, see "scaling questions" thread.
1) how much % of currently mined coins do you have, does the 51% dude have?
2) I knew you would say that. Damn. So let's say your wallet would be stolen. Would TBX be destroyed?
3) check
4) Is the scrypt algorithm secure btw?

Isn't everyone a little bit satoshi? Some should be much more satoshi.



blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
Pages: « 1 2 [3]  All
  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!