KanoPool since 2014 🐈 - PPLNS and Solo 0.5% fee - Worldwide - 2438 blocks

[philipma1957]

Reading the thoughts about rentals.
I begin to think that maybe Kano should forbid rentals ?

interesting idea but not sure if he can do that on a technical level.

I have about 30th in real gear  pointed at the pool from:
my house 1 ip from
my friends office 2 ips
from the solar array 3 ips

you send me a pm with an email to contact.

I contact the email and you tell me you want to rent the solar array for a month 25th at x dollars.

you tell me point it to  your account.   I tell you kano banned rentals so if I point it to your account you will be caught.

you say keep it where it is  tell me what is in the btc address  and in a month  give me what it earns above that.

How can anyone stop that?

But stopping nicehash westhash rental  maybe it can be done.

I used to rent a coin or 2 a month from them.  I don't anymore. I think a lot of people have cut back on renting which is why the pool is at 32 ph not 40 ph. Kano need to detect rental hash and clock its shares to get an idea of how lucky or unlucky it is.

[jonnybravo0311]

NH/WH is very easy to identify: their IP addresses.  To ban them would simply be to blacklist their IP addresses at the firewall.

[clgrissom3]

NH/WH is very easy to identify: their IP addresses.  To ban them would simply be to blacklist their IP addresses at the firewall.

That's what I was thinking...it should be pretty easy to identify NH/WH rentals.

[philipma1957]

NH/WH is very easy to identify: their IP addresses.  To ban them would simply be to blacklist their IP addresses at the firewall.

That's what I was thinking...it should be pretty easy to identify NH/WH rentals.

simple to do:

 a 1 week ban then 1 week have them back

 then compare numbers.

do that 5 times  ten weeks in all.

See what happens with five tests.  if good  wait 10 weeks and do the tests again.

1)ten weeks of test ½ on ½ off >>   if huge difference consider ban if close results do step 2
2)ten weeks nothing   >>>>>>>    if huge difference consider ban if close results do step 3
3)ten weeks of test ½ on ½ off >>>   if huge difference consider ban


seems fair enough

[firetreeactual]

Interesting discussion. I've never considered renting for two reasons, the first that I don't see enough transparency in any of the renting ops to make me comfy that they're doing what they say they're doing, and the second being that I'm too paranoid to forget the first reason. 

While I've only been back to mining in earnest for a few months, I've been involved with the system since it began. I've seen every sort of attempt at gaming the system. I know CK made it clear earlier that there really isn't a way to "game" the network as such (agreed), but dishonesty raises its head wherever there are humans, and there are certainly ways to run a flim-flam around folks' vulnerabilities. This area (renting) is one. I learned a hard lesson when I lost a bundle (it didn't seem like a bundle then, but sure does now) at Mt. Gox, for example, as did many others. As a result I don't keep any BTC in anyone's wallet but mine, unless I'm exchanging, and it's only there momentarily.

Whatever effect the rentals have on ckpool is rather out of my ability (or desire, actually) to try to figure out with any accuracy...however, I'm quite confident that Kano has the desire, the ability, and sufficient PepsiMax to prevail. 

Geez...I'd give just about anything for another 60A in my flat.

[jonnybravo0311]

Renting is a double edged sword.  I know that I've certainly hit blocks from rentals, as have many others.  The problem is that the rental sites hide the nefarious actions of the malicious actors.  You cannot know whether the hash you have rented is truly ever going to solve a block for you.

Let's take the classic block withholding attack as an example.  If I'm a bad actor and I try to point my gear at a regular pool, I might get away with it for a while, but chances are exceptionally good I will be found.  If I instead point my gear to NH, I am hidden.  Since my bad gear is combined with good gear, and my gear can constantly be pointed to different targets, there's no way to ever track me.  It's the perfect hiding place for me, and I'm absolutely guaranteed to get paid.

[firetreeactual]

Renting is a double edged sword.  I know that I've certainly hit blocks from rentals, as have many others.  The problem is that the rental sites hide the nefarious actions of the malicious actors.  You cannot know whether the hash you have rented is truly ever going to solve a block for you.

Let's take the classic block withholding attack as an example.  If I'm a bad actor and I try to point my gear at a regular pool, I might get away with it for a while, but chances are exceptionally good I will be found.  If I instead point my gear to NH, I am hidden.  Since my bad gear is combined with good gear, and my gear can constantly be pointed to different targets, there's no way to ever track me.  It's the perfect hiding place for me, and I'm absolutely guaranteed to get paid.

Yup...guess that's most of my point. If I don't have any knowledge/control/effect on blackhat players being involved in something that affects my bottom line, I don't play that game (if I can avoid it). Whether to block them from a pool is another point, and I think that's up to Kano/CK as it's their op. My own feeling is that if you can come up with hard data that demonstrates with some certainty that a given user/rental shop is not "on the up & up," you get rid of them if you can. BTC has no "owners" as such, but pools do, and I'm getting the impression that Kano's already on this. We'll see how it works out. So far, so good.

Mine on.

[vg54dett]

Reading the thoughts about rentals.
I begin to think that maybe Kano should forbid rentals ?

interesting idea but not sure if he can do that on a technical level.

I have about 30th in real gear  pointed at the pool from:
my house 1 ip from
my friends office 2 ips
from the solar array 3 ips

you send me a pm with an email to contact.

I contact the email and you tell me you want to rent the solar array for a month 25th at x dollars.

you tell me point it to  your account.   I tell you kano banned rentals so if I point it to your account you will be caught.

you say keep it where it is  tell me what is in the btc address  and in a month  give me what it earns above that.

How can anyone stop that?

But stopping nicehash westhash rental  maybe it can be done.

I used to rent a coin or 2 a month from them.  I don't anymore. I think a lot of people have cut back on renting which is why the pool is at 32 ph not 40 ph. Kano need to detect rental hash and clock its shares to get an idea of how lucky or unlucky it is.

I obviously was speaking about banning nicehash/westhash (and any suspected risky rental service) and not about personnal rental such as your solar array example.

I think we all, (as kano pool users) , would not loose anything if we were banning nicehash for precautionary principle.
Worst case scenario : the loss of pool hashrate would maybe get us less block , but bigger rewards.
Best case scenario : we avoid bad shares from renting and get a better ratio

The only kano users that would be injured by this new rule are the pro-rentals, but I think they will accept it because there is a real risk that their rental be not profitabe even for them.

[RealMalatesta]

Don't know a lot about renting, but: I put som gear into Nicehash, and immedeately, the reported hashrate was down to about 2 Th/s. Then pointed the gear to kano.io, where it reports 4.74. Those are two Avalon 6 which seem to be a tad sour, however, the difference of more than 50% struck me. Repeated it - same result.... So without knowing the details, it seems as if something is a bit fishy.

[PassThePopcorn]

Reading the thoughts about rentals.
I begin to think that maybe Kano should forbid rentals ?

interesting idea but not sure if he can do that on a technical level.

I have about 30th in real gear  pointed at the pool from:
my house 1 ip from
my friends office 2 ips
from the solar array 3 ips

you send me a pm with an email to contact.

I contact the email and you tell me you want to rent the solar array for a month 25th at x dollars.

you tell me point it to  your account.   I tell you kano banned rentals so if I point it to your account you will be caught.

you say keep it where it is  tell me what is in the btc address  and in a month  give me what it earns above that.

How can anyone stop that?

But stopping nicehash westhash rental  maybe it can be done.

I used to rent a coin or 2 a month from them.  I don't anymore. I think a lot of people have cut back on renting which is why the pool is at 32 ph not 40 ph. Kano need to detect rental hash and clock its shares to get an idea of how lucky or unlucky it is.

I obviously was speaking about banning nicehash/westhash (and any suspected risky rental service) and not about personnal rental such as your solar array example.

I think we all, (as kano pool users) , would not loose anything if we were banning nicehash for precautionary principle.
Worst case scenario : the loss of pool hashrate would maybe get us less block , but bigger rewards.
Best case scenario : we avoid bad shares from renting and get a better ratio

The only kano users that would be injured by this new rule are the pro-rentals, but I think they will accept it because there is a real risk that their rental be not profitabe even for them.

Private rentals can still be a thing. Large mines for the most part do like renting their hashrate and getting a payment upfront even if it is less than what they could have earned mining themselves, it takes a little risk away from them and puts BTC into their wallets immediately. Now with private renting there would definitely be minimums, like hashrate and duration as a mine operator does not want to take that much time dividing out the equipment. The people who like getting 100TH+ for 24 hours or more will probably be fine, it's the renters that want to grab a few TH for a few hours that would be affected mostly.

[yochdog]

Someone needs to explain to me the motivation for a block withholding attack.  My understanding is the attacker gains nothing.....

[yochdog]

Reading the thoughts about rentals.
I begin to think that maybe Kano should forbid rentals ?

interesting idea but not sure if he can do that on a technical level.

I have about 30th in real gear  pointed at the pool from:
my house 1 ip from
my friends office 2 ips
from the solar array 3 ips

you send me a pm with an email to contact.

I contact the email and you tell me you want to rent the solar array for a month 25th at x dollars.

you tell me point it to  your account.   I tell you kano banned rentals so if I point it to your account you will be caught.

you say keep it where it is  tell me what is in the btc address  and in a month  give me what it earns above that.

How can anyone stop that?

But stopping nicehash westhash rental  maybe it can be done.

I used to rent a coin or 2 a month from them.  I don't anymore. I think a lot of people have cut back on renting which is why the pool is at 32 ph not 40 ph. Kano need to detect rental hash and clock its shares to get an idea of how lucky or unlucky it is.

I obviously was speaking about banning nicehash/westhash (and any suspected risky rental service) and not about personnal rental such as your solar array example.

I think we all, (as kano pool users) , would not loose anything if we were banning nicehash for precautionary principle.
Worst case scenario : the loss of pool hashrate would maybe get us less block , but bigger rewards.
Best case scenario : we avoid bad shares from renting and get a better ratio

The only kano users that would be injured by this new rule are the pro-rentals, but I think they will accept it because there is a real risk that their rental be not profitabe even for them.

Private rentals can still be a thing. Large mines for the most part do like renting their hashrate and getting a payment upfront even if it is less than what they could have earned mining themselves, it takes a little risk away from them and puts BTC into their wallets immediately. Now with private renting there would definitely be minimums, like hashrate and duration as a mine operator does not want to take that much time dividing out the equipment. The people who like getting 100TH+ for 24 hours or more will probably be fine, it's the renters that want to grab a few TH for a few hours that would be affected mostly.

I will rent ya'all some private hash power! 

[clgrissom3]

Block by Elchapo with 90THs!  Welcome to the Acclaim Board with your first Kano Block! 

[ShrykeZ]

Eyyyyy ElChapo, congratulations! Block party.

[not.you]

Someone needs to explain to me the motivation for a block withholding attack.  My understanding is the attacker gains nothing.....

The withholder gets paid but doesn't raise the network difficulty.  They get paid by the pool where they appear to add hashrate but since they never find blocks the bitcoin network doesn't adjust difficulty any higher for their hashrate since, again, they never actually contribute blocks.  

The thing is that you have to have a lot of hashrate for this to matter.  I would think with difficulty where it is now and where it looks likely to go soon (with bitfury building more efficient chips now and BW also supposedly building with new gen chips and BMT announcing the S9 soonish) you would need to measure your hashrate in Ph/s for a block withholding attack to even matter in terms of making a dent in the network diff jumps.  It matters to a pool of course if you have 750 Th/s or something like that and withhold blocks, but what's the point other than stealing from the pool?  The difference that will make in terms of network difficulty seems like it isn't worth it.

And hiding Ph/s worth of block withholding is much easier to do on a big pool than on a small one although it could be done on a rental site.  

[clgrissom3]

Someone needs to explain to me the motivation for a block withholding attack.  My understanding is the attacker gains nothing.....

There are 2 reasons basically...if they had a farm full of custom equipment that were not capable of hitting a block but had super cheap power, they could still earn shares and get paid even though they knew they would never hit a block of any kind.  The expense of upgrading would be just too high to motivate them to fix the issue and they just keep mining as-is until they are discovered and get run off.

The second reason would be to simply to crap on a pool hard enough to hurt them and drive them out of business. 

[not.you]

There are 2 reasons basically...if they had a farm full of custom equipment that were not capable of hitting a block but had super cheap power, they could still earn shares and get paid even though they knew they would never hit a block of any kind.  The expense of upgrading would be just too high to motivate them to fix the issue and they just keep mining as-is until they are discovered and get run off.

In this situation, unless they are continuing to build said equipment (which wouldn't make sense) then increasing network hashrate would make their gear less and less relevant over time just like all mining hardware.  I have an S1, a BFL jalapeno, a BFL little single, and 2 AMT block erupters in my personal BTC mining museum (literally a pile in the corner) but if these things were somehow incapable of hitting blocks at current difficulty due to software\firmware issues, their hashrate is so low it would be pointless to use them even if I had hundreds of them.  If someone developed their own hardware and it was literally incapable of finding blocks, the steady increase of miners on the network would eventually make that gear meaningless to run even with free electricity.  Basically it means this theory requires that the gear be somewhat newish, like something built in the last year to 18 months or so.  If it was older than that they would need quite a lot of it to still aggregate to any decent amount of hash now.

The second reason would be to simply to crap on a pool hard enough to hurt them and drive them out of business.  

This is possible.  The thing is that the attacker is stealing from the miners on the pool and not the pool op, although as we have all seen, a lot of bad luck does tend to send miners elsewhere.  This would imply someone associated with their own pool or cloud mining service.  This seems the most likely real world scenario for a withholding attack to me.  Plus it makes the most sense.  They would need access to a lot of hashrate and they would have to be knowledgeable enough to write the software that was witholding blocks.  It would require running a lot of hashrate through a proxy or filter of some kind.  These things suggest a pool or cloudhashing service.  But this should (eventually) be possible to spot since it would be a lot of hashrate coming from a single or a few IP's.

Block by Elchapo with 90THs!  Welcome to the Acclaim Board with your first Kano Block! 

Only 6 seconds after the bitfury block.  Must be why we only got 87 transactions in it.  Still, better than the 0 transactions it would have had if it was found by one of the pools-which-must-not-be-named.

[tlhIlwI]

I stayed away from rentals for months while occasionally mentioning the withholding risk, but I never saw any evidence of it happening.  Despite the amount of rental activity this pool was getting, our long term averages just didn't show an issue.  The math made/makes the risk from rental withholding low (e.g. if 10% of the pool were rentals and 10% of the rental service was bad hash, then the impact on the pool would be 1% -- I'm talking typical rental activity here, not the block busting bursts).  With no evidence of withholding actually happening, the 1% risk wasn't too bad.  So, I gave (and still am) rentals a shot.  At the best point I was up over 1BTC.  The bad luck came and I kept renting steady through the bad luck.  I lost 2BTC and found myself down 1BTC.  Now, just as I'm beginning to recover (maybe) with an upturn in luck, is when a campaign starts to ban rentals from the pool...

Don't get me wrong, if rentals are provably causing the pool harm then something should be done about them (myself included), but let's wait until Kano looks through the data before jumping to (and acting on) conclusions. 

Regardless, a lot of the rental problem may go away on its own on 6/1 anyway.  NH is switching to PH units but keeping the 0.0001 scale (so, to decrease what is now a single step from 0.0026 to 0.0025 will require going 2.6000, 2.5999, 2.5998, etc. one step at a time with minutes of delay between each tiny step).  That is probably going to make it impossible to get the rental price back down to anything decent whenever the mysterious highly overpriced infinity hash rate orders flash up for an hour and go away.  Anyone who runs a bot to maintain a steady N avg (like myself) is going to find this a nuisance-- possibly enough to give up.

[jonnybravo0311]

I'm not advocating the banning of rentals.  In fact, I have spent way more coin (think nearly 100BTC) on rentals than I probably should have.  Personally, I've seen no indication of bad actors as I've hit 6 blocks with rentals (4 on my own pool, 2 on pools previous to my pool starting).

My only point was that if I'm a bad actor, the rental services are where I'd hide because tracking me would be extremely difficult.

[philipma1957]

I'm not advocating the banning of rentals.  In fact, I have spent way more coin (think nearly 100BTC) on rentals than I probably should have.  Personally, I've seen no indication of bad actors as I've hit 6 blocks with rentals (4 on my own pool, 2 on pools previous to my pool starting).

My only point was that if I'm a bad actor, the rental services are where I'd hide because tracking me would be extremely difficult.

I have hit 4 blocks with rentals  pushed about 110 coins in to get 100 coins back.

So while not lucky certainly not terrible bad luck.

Kano can do studies and decide if nicehash-westhash has really bad luck.