Bitcoin Forum
December 02, 2016, 08:21:03 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 [327] 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 ... 426 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [CLOSED] BTC Guild - Pays TxFees+NMC, Stratum, VarDiff, Private Servers  (Read 828238 times)
This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic.
hurricandave
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 864



View Profile
March 22, 2014, 02:45:19 PM
 #6521

You can't engineer a machine to solve a block. Just hash faster to increase the chances that one of the hashes you complete solves A block. Anyone has a chance to solve the blocks qualifying share but the faster you complete your share the faster you get another one, increasing your chance of being the one who solves the block by having more opportunities. If someone was taking share assignments and submitting pure garbage back at a high rate even if it was a really fast machine, the reject percentage would climb high enough that the pool OP should be alerted to determine if it needed banned. The thing that blows me away is the volume of people I have noticed that post they have 1 or 5 Antminer S1's and they don't know what they are doing and are complaining about there high HW errors, cumulatively what kind of effect is that kind of out of control hash power doing to the pool its pointed at?
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 22, 2014, 02:54:41 PM
 #6522

You can't engineer a machine to solve a block. Just hash faster to increase the chances that one of the hashes you complete solves A block. Anyone has a chance to solve the blocks qualifying share but the faster you complete your share the faster you get another one, increasing your chance of being the one who solves the block by having more opportunities. If someone was taking share assignments and submitting pure garbage back at a high rate even if it was a really fast machine, the reject percentage would climb high enough that the pool OP should be alerted to determine if it needed banned. The thing that blows me away is the volume of people I have noticed that post they have 1 or 5 Antminer S1's and they don't know what they are doing and are complaining about there high HW errors, cumulatively what kind of effect is that kind of out of control hash power doing to the pool its pointed at?

Rejected shares are not included in the pool's hashrate, so this doesn't affect Minor Miner's concerns.

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

Activity: 675



View Profile
March 22, 2014, 02:55:28 PM
 #6523

Is a withold-and-mutate block attack possible ?
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 22, 2014, 02:56:19 PM
 #6524

Is a withold-and-mutate block attack possible ?

Is this a biology question? Smiley

I don't know what you mean, sorry.

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

Activity: 675



View Profile
March 22, 2014, 03:15:16 PM
 #6525

Could block winning shares be malleable, to make a block witholding attack viable.
irrational
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


View Profile
March 22, 2014, 03:21:27 PM
 #6526

Could block winning shares be malleable, to make a block witholding attack viable.

If you are asking if a share can be stolen (withheld) by a miner for the purpose of "redeeming" on their own, then the answer is "no". That is not possible, each share is hashed such that the pool is the payout address.

The only reason a miner would withhold a block solution is to cause financial hardship on a pool. They gain no direct financial gain from this.

14Cow1HA12umeV3zdZXNmrE3TsnYaaf4Q5
organofcorti
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1946


Poor impulse control.


View Profile WWW
March 22, 2014, 03:22:01 PM
 #6527

Could block winning shares be malleable, to make a block witholding attack viable.

A block withholding attack doesn't need a special proof of work, just the ability to report only the ones that wont solve blocks.

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

Activity: 161


View Profile
March 22, 2014, 08:29:34 PM
 #6528

...
More just want to maximize the amount of coins I can pull in with the first few months to ensure good ROI on these asic chips. Any input is greatly appreciated.
Thanks for your input thus far eleuthria.

Hi Syber.
Ditto that here. I'm waiting on KNC to send me my Neptune 3TH miner to get it going asap so I can make up the ROI asap before all hell breaks loose if I can get a positive ROI that is.

Regards,

Suzukii

(Live long & ...keep mining)

Hardware:
Avalon 200Gh/s 55nm | Raspberry Pi model B | Minepeon 0.2.4.3 (...was 0.2.5-pr2) | BFGMiner 3.10.0 | 28x Manhattan USB 2.0/3.0 powered Hub | 5x ASIC Block Erupter @333 MH/s | 3x BFL Jalapeño's Total ~232.7 GH/s
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
March 22, 2014, 11:28:27 PM
 #6529

Looks like the filtering server (used to validate good miners from likely botnet/DDoS attacks) is...getting filtered because OVH thought it was under attack (logs show no such attack).  I've temporarily pointed the filtering server (stratum.btcguild.com) elsewhere until OVH removes it from the attack mitigation system.  This shouldn't have had any effect on active miners, it would only have affected miners establishing new connections (either due to a restart, disconnect, or being a new miner).


EDIT:  No, the pool does *not* use OVH for it's actual servers.  It uses them as an external validation server so that if the pool is under attack it acts as a first line of defense before an attack might affect legitimate miners.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
xZork
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 646


View Profile
March 23, 2014, 02:25:40 AM
 #6530

Looks like the filtering server (used to validate good miners from likely botnet/DDoS attacks) is...getting filtered because OVH thought it was under attack (logs show no such attack).  I've temporarily pointed the filtering server (stratum.btcguild.com) elsewhere until OVH removes it from the attack mitigation system.  This shouldn't have had any effect on active miners, it would only have affected miners establishing new connections (either due to a restart, disconnect, or being a new miner).


EDIT:  No, the pool does *not* use OVH for it's actual servers.  It uses them as an external validation server so that if the pool is under attack it acts as a first line of defense before an attack might affect legitimate miners.

Please update when I can reconnect.

Thanks!

Never mind, got connected. Just threw up a bunch of odd errors and took a while to get going.

eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
March 23, 2014, 02:28:19 AM
 #6531

Looks like the filtering server (used to validate good miners from likely botnet/DDoS attacks) is...getting filtered because OVH thought it was under attack (logs show no such attack).  I've temporarily pointed the filtering server (stratum.btcguild.com) elsewhere until OVH removes it from the attack mitigation system.  This shouldn't have had any effect on active miners, it would only have affected miners establishing new connections (either due to a restart, disconnect, or being a new miner).


EDIT:  No, the pool does *not* use OVH for it's actual servers.  It uses them as an external validation server so that if the pool is under attack it acts as a first line of defense before an attack might affect legitimate miners.

Please update when I can reconnect.

Thanks!

You should be able to reconnect just fine.  It was resolved about 30 minutes after that post (and as of that post it should've worked fine,  just pointing you to EU instead of US for a little while).

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
aurel57
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050



View Profile
March 23, 2014, 10:02:30 AM
 #6532

Is a withold-and-mutate block attack possible ?
Zombie attack  Tongue
 
stan258
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 437



View Profile
March 24, 2014, 02:00:41 PM
 #6533

Some pools like ghash and discus fish limit the size of the transaction they pull from the network have anything to do with it? Any rate I will be adding on some of Bens osm miners tomorrow night.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
March 24, 2014, 06:45:44 PM
 #6534

Fixed two little errors that popped up:

1) Load balancer was dropping some packets due to a change in filtering rules that had a small chance at false positives.  Edited the rules to hopefully remove the false positives.
2) An auto payout failed (#32518).  It has been removed from your payout history if you were paid in that batch and it will be caught up with the next automatic payout.  The error was due to an auto payout attempting to execute at the same time I was working on the hot wallet server, causing the sendmany request to timeout.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
hurricandave
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 864



View Profile
March 24, 2014, 08:35:55 PM
 #6535

I am getting an Error 500 trying to log into the BTC Guild Website.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
March 24, 2014, 08:37:09 PM
 #6536

There's a brief database maintenance going on right now to clear out some of the old PPS junk that is thankfully no longer needed.  Additionally making a small update to the PPLNS History table.  Hopefully this will only take a few minutes.

Mining servers will continue to function fine, as will the API.  I only brought down the front end in order to reduce the amount of queries attempting to hit the PPLNS History table while the table structure update runs.  It's the largest table in the database, so it takes a while to push any kind of structure change.


UPDATE:  Maintenance time complete, front end is back up.

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
hurricandave
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 864



View Profile
March 24, 2014, 08:58:18 PM
 #6537

OOOOO, had me scared I messed up sum tin......
hurricandave
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 864



View Profile
March 25, 2014, 10:13:59 AM
 #6538

It looks like the last dozen shifts have run for 62.5 minutes avg. did you adjust the shift size again or have we been chewing on more difficult blocks?
mdude77
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1358


View Profile
March 25, 2014, 01:24:07 PM
 #6539

It looks like the last dozen shifts have run for 62.5 minutes avg. did you adjust the shift size again or have we been chewing on more difficult blocks?

difficulty just increased.

M

MMinerMonitor author, monitor/auto/schedule reboots/alerts/remote/MobileMiner for Ants and Spondoolies! Latest (5.2). MPoolMonitor author, monitor stats/workers for most pools, global BTC stats (current/nxt diff/USD val/hashrate/calc)! Latest (v4.2) 
Buyer beware of Bitmain hardware and services.
eleuthria
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1750


BTC Guild Owner


View Profile WWW
March 25, 2014, 05:27:39 PM
 #6540

It looks like the last dozen shifts have run for 62.5 minutes avg. did you adjust the shift size again or have we been chewing on more difficult blocks?

Shift length was increased when the difficulty increased in order to keep the target blocks per shift above 10 (IE:  On average 1 block is found during each shift).

R.I.P. BTC Guild, 2011 - 2015.
BTC Guild Forum Thread
Pages: « 1 ... 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 [327] 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 ... 426 »
  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!