In case of a 51% attack, can the damage be reverted?

[aliashraf]

Are the parallels to Bitcoin Cash intentional? :3
Currently it definitely seems like social attacks would be the most effective way to damage Bitcoin in the long term.

and centralized mining-pools here (because of providing the information about the overall hash-power of the network, that the network protocol is blind about it) are responsible for such damages to the crypto community. you know very well that blockchains set up their block difficulty by timing that they need -  not the hash power of decentralized miners around it. hash power is the sort of information that comes from pools. if someone really wants to perform an attack, needs to monitor the activity of pools and the distribution of processing power among them. the paper bellow (which discusses the selfish miners behavior and their effects on a crypto-currency. based on the paper selfish miners could attack a network by 25% processing power) has some good notes in this area too:

http://www.mixoftix.net/knowledge_base/blockchain/Bitcoin_Mining_is_Vulnerable.pdf

and this is where we could understand the importance of ideas in post entitled "Getting rid of pools: Proof of Collaborative Work":

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4438334.0

َthanks for mentioning my topic, I just sent you some merits to you because of it:D

You couldn't be true more about pools being major vulnerability and points of failure but I think you need to revise your assumption about them being the only source of information for attackers to analyse hashrate and planning required resources:

Calculating network total hashrate is possible with a reasonable accuracy by taking into account current network difficulty and the time elapsed for generating a sufficiently large number of blocks (100-200 blocks). Actually bitcoin uses this approach for latest 2016 blocks to adjust difficulty target.

[1715245553]

1715245553

[1715245553]

1715245553

[1715245553]

1715245553

[mixoftix]

thanks for mentioning my topic, I just sent you some merits to you because of it:D

this is important everybody knows about the real role of pools and attempt to replace them with something more reliable - my pleasure.

I think you need to revise your assumption about them being the only source of information for attackers to analyse hashrate and planning required resources:

that part related to pools was about analyzing the distribution of hash rate, not the whole hash rate of entire network..

[mixoftix]

We're starting getting off-topic, someone should make new thread.

good point, but this is still about the impact of distribution of hash power among pools in case of 51% attack

Don't forget about decentralized pool such as http://p2pool.org/, even though almost no miners use it.

thank you for information.
from website: "P2Pool is based on the same peer-2-peer (P2P) model as Bitcoin".

so, receiving job of a blockchain from another sharechain is going to bring transparency in business aspects of internal activities of pools, but I didn't find any difference about preventing a pool from gathering more than 51% power of the entire network. do I understand it right?