KanoPool since 2014 🐈 - PPLNS and Solo 0.5% fee - Worldwide - 2435 blocks

[AriesIV10]

See what happens when you have great Payouts, great learning, great fun with a pool.......GROWth!!

CKPool:     12,032.31THs

[kano]

... and on the subject of changes ...

There's been some important changes on the ckpool local <->remote node code by -ck so there'll be a set of updates with those in about 18 hours.
I'll post again tomorrow morning (it's early afternoon here now) an hour before I do that with ckpool on all the nodes.

...

Here's that 1 hour warning to let everyone know.

In just over 1 hour I'll be doing ckpool updates on the "5" nodes.
When the minute hand hits zero in 65 minutes at 23:00 UTC

Each update is immediate, no delays or anything like that.

Firstly the main node which will be the usual case of most miners should just see a reconnect in cgminer, though a small % will failover.
People on the remote nodes have a higher chance of failover when the main node restarts.

Then will be the Tube nonce connection (1) and each of the remote nodes (3)
These updates should only see reconnects and no failovers.

There will also be a reduction in stales on the remote nodes due to this update.

[cryptichermit]

Or they could have rolled 25 times in a casino in less than 5 minutes

No, they couldn't.  Seems that Casino's have a no entry policy rule against 60 year old voodoo cheerleader clowns.
Something about too much havoc wreaking from 3ft tall fertility goddesses, Indian Jones statues, and crystal rocks on the tables.
Not to mention the smell of poultry, scraps of chicken skin, and grease left on the dice/chips.  Then there's the incessant shouts of "For those about to ROCK!", followed by head banging and fist pounding.

[wolfen]

One of my s7's has been at .02 HWE for two weeks, running at the bottom of my worker list on the worker page.
I rebooted it and now it is running at .002 HWE. I guess sometimes a power cycle will kick the HWE up until a reboot occurs.

[suchmoon]

Or they could have rolled 25 times in a casino in less than 5 minutes

No, they couldn't.  Seems that Casino's have a no entry policy rule against 60 year old voodoo cheerleader clowns.
Something about too much havoc wreaking from 3ft tall fertility goddesses, Indian Jones statues, and crystal rocks on the tables.
Not to mention the smell of poultry, scraps of chicken skin, and grease left on the dice/chips.  Then there's the incessant shouts of "For those about to ROCK!", followed by head banging and fist pounding.

ONLINE casino. Online. Who would even think of stepping out of the house these days. There is no ad breaks in Netflix you know.

[firetreeactual]

One of my s7's has been at .02 HWE for two weeks, running at the bottom of my worker list on the worker page.
I rebooted it and now it is running at .002 HWE. I guess sometimes a power cycle will kick the HWE up until a reboot occurs.

Yup. Interesting that it's S7s (I don't have one yet). My old S2 is like that, but occasionally an S3 will do the same. I've found that doing a reboot via the html interface only reboots the OS, and the controller can get confused all on its own, so a cold boot will reset everything once you've done your config. How are your S7s for temp? I live in the tropics and would like to move up.
 

[coffeeangst]

It has also been posted many times about if you can  trust the miners you rent to report a block if found. Also you have no idea how far away from the pools servers they are located.

I've been wondering about this.  Does anyone have any references on this, or perhaps kano/ck can comment on what safeguards exist against bad miners?  Do you test miners periodically to see if they faithfully report winning hashes?

[firetreeactual]

It has also been posted many times about if you can  trust the miners you rent to report a block if found. Also you have no idea how far away from the pools servers they are located.

I've been wondering about this.  Does anyone have any references on this, or perhaps kano/ck can comment on what safeguards exist against bad miners?  Do you test miners periodically to see if they faithfully report winning hashes?

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'... 

[coffeeangst]

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'... 

Specifically, the hypothesis is that dishonest miners are contributing hashes but stealing blocks from various pools.  If pools don't have a way of detecting such behavior, then what you would see is some longer-established pools starting to see consistent lower luck.  New small pools such as kano would see relatively higher luck until the dishonest miners start infiltrating them as well.  In other words, the anecdotal data on "luck" of different pools is consistent with there being dishonest miners out there.

So what is or can be done to detect and/or block such miners?  Certainly over time you can run statistical tests that would identify miners with below-average luck.  At some point that becomes statistically significant, but a smart dishonest player could keep changing accounts to make this hard to detect.

Or more realtime tricks could be done by the pool to detect and kill bad players up front.

[kano]

... and on the subject of changes ...

There's been some important changes on the ckpool local <->remote node code by -ck so there'll be a set of updates with those in about 18 hours.
I'll post again tomorrow morning (it's early afternoon here now) an hour before I do that with ckpool on all the nodes.

...

Here's that 1 hour warning to let everyone know.

In just over 1 hour I'll be doing ckpool updates on the "5" nodes.
When the minute hand hits zero in 65 minutes at 23:00 UTC

Each update is immediate, no delays or anything like that.

Firstly the main node which will be the usual case of most miners should just see a reconnect in cgminer, though a small % will failover.
People on the remote nodes have a higher chance of failover when the main node restarts.

Then will be the Tube nonce connection (1) and each of the remote nodes (3)
These updates should only see reconnects and no failovers.

There will also be a reduction in stales on the remote nodes due to this update.

In 3 minutes.

[wolfen]

One of my s7's has been at .02 HWE for two weeks, running at the bottom of my worker list on the worker page.
I rebooted it and now it is running at .002 HWE. I guess sometimes a power cycle will kick the HWE up until a reboot occurs.

Yup. Interesting that it's S7s (I don't have one yet). My old S2 is like that, but occasionally an S3 will do the same. I've found that doing a reboot via the html interface only reboots the OS, and the controller can get confused all on its own, so a cold boot will reset everything once you've done your config. How are your S7s for temp? I live in the tropics and would like to move up.
 

Unless your ambient temp is low it is a flame thrower.
I have two in my 400sqft garage and it it 32 degrees outside. Garage temp is tropical and it is  not sealed well.
Think 2400 watt space heater.

[kano]

I guess in case anyone was wanting an update

Yep it's all done (over 35 minutes ago) and the only one minor hitch was that the nonce proxy failed-over one user unexpectedly due to having to kill the nonce proxy and restart it.

All's good.

[elokk]

It has also been posted many times about if you can  trust the miners you rent to report a block if found. Also you have no idea how far away from the pools servers they are located.

I've been wondering about this.  Does anyone have any references on this, or perhaps kano/ck can comment on what safeguards exist against bad miners?  Do you test miners periodically to see if they faithfully report winning hashes?

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'... 

Bernie Sanders?!? Looks like we have a socialist mining here  

[PPOC]

Anyone notice the little over 40PH that Ant lost today? I think it's helping keep the 10m block times and MAYBE diff in check this cycle. Where did it go? Maybe the s3 hashnest that just went negative maintenance? I always thought they were running all s7 and just charging people different rates for s3,4,5. Maybe they really had a legit s3 farm that they shut down?

Either way it good for keeping diff in check. Hope it lasts.

LLK

BTW, my new signature is LLK (long live KANO)

[OneInchWonder]

Anyone notice the little over 40PH that Ant lost today? I think it's helping keep the 10m block times and MAYBE diff in check this cycle. Where did it go? Maybe the s3 hashnest that just went negative maintenance? I always thought they were running all s7 and just charging people different rates for s3,4,5. Maybe they really had a legit s3 farm that they shut down?

Either way it good for keeping diff in check. Hope it lasts.

LLK

Kinda hard not to see a 40PH drop.
I was wondering what happen also.

[fr4nkthetank]

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'... 

Specifically, the hypothesis is that dishonest miners are contributing hashes but stealing blocks from various pools.  If pools don't have a way of detecting such behavior, then what you would see is some longer-established pools starting to see consistent lower luck.  New small pools such as kano would see relatively higher luck until the dishonest miners start infiltrating them as well.  In other words, the anecdotal data on "luck" of different pools is consistent with there being dishonest miners out there.

So what is or can be done to detect and/or block such miners?  Certainly over time you can run statistical tests that would identify miners with below-average luck.  At some point that becomes statistically significant, but a smart dishonest player could keep changing accounts to make this hard to detect.

Or more realtime tricks could be done by the pool to detect and kill bad players up front.

now where's the script for that ?    I'd have to go mine over at antpool or f2pool with that though huehuehue

[PPOC]

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'... 

Specifically, the hypothesis is that dishonest miners are contributing hashes but stealing blocks from various pools.  If pools don't have a way of detecting such behavior, then what you would see is some longer-established pools starting to see consistent lower luck.  New small pools such as kano would see relatively higher luck until the dishonest miners start infiltrating them as well.  In other words, the anecdotal data on "luck" of different pools is consistent with there being dishonest miners out there.

So what is or can be done to detect and/or block such miners?  Certainly over time you can run statistical tests that would identify miners with below-average luck.  At some point that becomes statistically significant, but a smart dishonest player could keep changing accounts to make this hard to detect.

Or more realtime tricks could be done by the pool to detect and kill bad players up front.

Don't know much about this but I can say that before I came to Kano, I used Slush and Bitminter. I rented from nice hash many times to supplement my own hardware and my rented hash has found a block for Bitminter and Slush. With Bitminter, my rented hash connected to them and within 30 minutes found a block. Funny thing was that my rental ended and the next block was over 300% so I got zero payment for that rented hash. Since my hash found a block so soon after connecting I did not have many shares on the 10 shifts they pay. On slush case it was about 18 hours after I rented the hash. In both cases it was 25th.

I also think we had several blocks found here with rented hash, just by looking at the worker names, don't know for sure but I'd say so with worker name like R1 or rent.

[organofcorti]

Specifically, the hypothesis is that dishonest miners are contributing hashes but stealing blocks from various pools. 

...

Miners can't steal blocks from pools, and this problem was addressed by the very first pooled mining groups.

If you mine at a pool, then you accept the pool's generation address and the block reward can only be paid to that address (or addresses). If a miner attempts to include a different address then the work will not be accepted by the pool.

[d57heinz]

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'...  

Specifically, the hypothesis is that dishonest miners are contributing hashes but stealing blocks from various pools.  If pools don't have a way of detecting such behavior, then what you would see is some longer-established pools starting to see consistent lower luck.  New small pools such as kano would see relatively higher luck until the dishonest miners start infiltrating them as well.  In other words, the anecdotal data on "luck" of different pools is consistent with there being dishonest miners out there.

So what is or can be done to detect and/or block such miners?  Certainly over time you can run statistical tests that would identify miners with below-average luck.  At some point that becomes statistically significant, but a smart dishonest player could keep changing accounts to make this hard to detect.

Or more realtime tricks could be done by the pool to detect and kill bad players up front.

now where's the script for that ?    I'd have to go mine over at antpool or f2pool with that though huehuehue

I thought i read somewhere that there was a proposal and it went something like this.. The pool operator is able to send your miner a "fake" share that would result in the miner returning a valid block to that fake share. then you could tell if the miners are witholding blocks.. Let me do some digging and ill come up with the article..

Best regards
d57heinz

Edit found one article about it..

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1338/how-is-block-solution-withholding-a-threat-to-mining-pools    read down thru the comments


5
down vote
A "check block" and "block found reward" combined are an effective counter measure.

Once a "good" miner reports a valid block the pool operator could resend it to other members of the pool (maybe random % of pool, maybe pool members who are "unlucky" , etc). As others have indicated if you sent it to entire pool that would be detectable by bad miners so pool would need to experiment with what fraction of pool is the best countermeasure.

The pool operator knows this header (with this specific extra nonce) is valid. If a miner reports it as invalid he is suspicious. If he keeps doing it then he is an attacker and the pool bans him and seizes his funds. Most pools hold 120 blocks worth of rewards as unconfirmed meaning the attacker risks losing more than one block worth of compensation everytime he cheats. To avoid bad morale the pool operator could split the siezed funds among "good miners" to compensate them for the times when bad "miners" are not caught.

Another method which can be combined with the check block is to provide a "block found reward". Collect an x% fee from all miners and award the miner who finds the block this fee. In the long run this fee has no cost to miners (they will receive as much as they payout). That puts a financial gain on finding a block. This increases the revenue loss an attacker will incur by witholding blocks. That combined with risk of getting caught and losing all unconfirmed rewards should be sufficient to make block witholding punitively expensive for the attacker.

shareimprove this answer
edited Oct 28 '11 at 13:28
answered Oct 6 '11 at 21:11

DeathAndTaxes
5,8601653
add a comment

[-ck]

Well...your question itself is the reason I don't rent hash. There's no BTCPD gonna look out for us. Our security is our own responsibility. That said, I'm sure the renters are, on the whole, honest...but I don't see much of a way to independently (as a user) verify that, and so my basically paranoid personality tends to rely on my own gear, and on a pool that essentially has the Bernie Sanders outlook...keep it honest, keep it efficient, and keep on truckin'... 

Specifically, the hypothesis is that dishonest miners are contributing hashes but stealing blocks from various pools.  If pools don't have a way of detecting such behavior, then what you would see is some longer-established pools starting to see consistent lower luck.  New small pools such as kano would see relatively higher luck until the dishonest miners start infiltrating them as well.  In other words, the anecdotal data on "luck" of different pools is consistent with there being dishonest miners out there.

So what is or can be done to detect and/or block such miners?  Certainly over time you can run statistical tests that would identify miners with below-average luck.  At some point that becomes statistically significant, but a smart dishonest player could keep changing accounts to make this hard to detect.

Or more realtime tricks could be done by the pool to detect and kill bad players up front.

now where's the script for that ?    I'd have to go mine over at antpool or f2pool with that though huehuehue

I thought i read somewhere that there was a proposal and it went something like this.. The pool operator is able to send your miner a "fake" share that would result in the miner returning a valid block to that fake share. then you could tell if the miners are witholding blocks.. Let me do some digging and ill come up with the article..

Best regards
d57heinz

Not possible to do reliably. Don't bother digging it up again. There's no safe way to trust rentals is the final conclusion.