How much hash does BCX need to take out Monero? (Hardware / AWS calculation)

[ajaxgeorge]

I'm making a few assumptions here as I want to keep this worst case scenario.  I'd like some input.

Looking at Monero pools here - http://minexmr.com/pools.html - if BCX were able to take out one or more of the big pools with DDOS it would significantly lower the hash needed.  

If he manages to take out moneropool w ddos - that brings the network hash down to 13.4Mh/s.  So he needs 14Mh/s ish.
If he manages to take out the top three pools out - that brings the network hash down to 3.94Mh/s.  So he needs 4Mh/s ish.


Looks like an r9 290 = 600h/s & c38xlarge = 785 h/s.

Making the assumption he has a 1,000 GPU farm equivalent of R9 290's - that's 600 kh/s.  (5 200Amp panels should run this if the cards are pulling 300watts ea)

Making the assumption he has a huge botnet of 100K mid-range computers that get around 150 h/s.  1,500 kh/s

Making the assumption he is willing to burn 500 bitcoins/$200,000 on AWS (I have NO clue on if he would be able to scale it this big - pretty sure he couldn't get spot instances and would have to pay full price.  Now that I think about it - I'm not sure what it takes to get all limits removed on your aws account).  

c3.8xlarge = $1.68 an hour.  If he needs 48 hours that's $80.64 per instance.  So he'll be able to pay for 2,480 instances.  This adds another 1,946 kh/s

total = 4.046 Mh/s.

references

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=638915.0
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MI-ic0Os25hgGUImW54sUIjZY_pUNQNa_W8Se5pRGBs/edit?pli=1#gid=0


Will revise OP as I get input / try to figure out if this is possible.  

[aminorex]

With those numbers he couldn't even do a proper timewarp attack, let alone 51%.  I think he has more resources than you are counting, however.

[infofront]

By some estimates, BCX might be worth as much as $100,000,000+. He could get any amount of hash power he needs for a trivial (relative to him) amount. And, as Aminorex alluded to, he has a large network of other resources at his disposal.

[J1mb0]

With those numbers he couldn't even do a proper timewarp attack, let alone 51%.  I think he has more resources than you are counting, however.

I can't begin to analyze the numbers. However the network hash rate of Monero screams SCAM!   16MHs !!
There just isn't the community or interest in Monero outside of the sad little shills and sock puppets of the Bitcointalk world to produce this kind of rate organically.

Whilst whales like deplete-ila might be able to afford substantial AWS spends - this would not come near to the above figure. Which leaves either illegal bot farms or something even more sinister. Maybe 51% are closed clients reporting bogus net hash rates? After the last 3 months of Monero scamming I wouldn't put anything past this bunch of crooks.  

[illodin]

If he manages to take out moneropool w ddos - that brings the network hash down to 13.4Mh/s.  So he needs 7Mh/s ish.
If he manages to take out the top three pools out - that brings the network hash down to 3.94Mh/s.  So he needs 2Mh/s ish.

If the network is 13.4 he would need 13.4 to have 50%. Or did you mean that he only needs 33%?

[ajaxgeorge]

If he manages to take out moneropool w ddos - that brings the network hash down to 13.4Mh/s.  So he needs 7Mh/s ish.
If he manages to take out the top three pools out - that brings the network hash down to 3.94Mh/s.  So he needs 2Mh/s ish.

If the network is 13.4 he would need 13.4 to have 50%. Or did you mean that he only needs 33%?

ah yes.  I'm being dumb ... he needs the full hash to achieve an additional 50% - not half of it. 

ugh sry.

[aminorex]

If the network is 13.4 he would need 13.4 to have 50%. Or did you mean that he only needs 33%?

The network is now 26 mhps.  I expect it to go over 30 mhps by the time the "time to kill xmr"  clock runs out.  32 mhps seems more reasonable for estimations.

[TooDumbForBitcoin]

BCX said he has 19% of network hash rate. 

Maybe he meant 19% of Stolli inventory.

[ajaxgeorge]

If the network is 13.4 he would need 13.4 to have 50%. Or did you mean that he only needs 33%?

The network is now 26 mhps.  I expect it to go over 30 mhps by the time the "time to kill xmr"  clock runs out.  32 mhps seems more reasonable for estimations.

Where are you getting your hashrate from?  I would like to follow it live.  i got mine from http://minexmr.com/pools.html

do you think it's bcx ramping his hashrate up?  or people adding to it to secure the network?  or both 

[aminorex]

do you think it's bcx ramping his hashrate up?  or people adding to it to secure the network?  or both 

#2.  if i were bcx i'd be working on a testnet until i was ready to slam it hard.  a timewarp is in large part a readjustment exploit.  you don't want the difficulty to go high beforehand because of hysteresis.

chainradar.com/xmr/blocks

[aminorex]

BCX said he has 19% of network hash rate.  

He estimated that 19% or perhaps less was required to do a timewarp.  He implied that he had enough.  That's a lower bound, not an upper bound, on his hash power, but it incorporates an unknown linear factor (the perhaps less factor).

The longer you run a timewarp attack, the more likely it is to succeed.  That scales linearly because each trial is independent. (To a first approximation which fits this part of the actual distribution.)

[ajaxgeorge]

BCX said he has 19% of network hash rate.  

He estimated that 19% or perhaps less was required to do a timewarp.  He implied that he had enough.  That's a lower bound, not an upper bound, on his hash power, but it incorporates an unknown linear factor (the perhaps less factor).

The longer you run a timewarp attack, the more likely it is to succeed.  That scales linearly because each trial is independent.

so you're saying he needs 6mh/s to do a timewarp attack (assuming he's right about the 19%)?

edit:  do we know who owns the top 3 pools?  buying a pool might be cheaper than hashrate if the owner is willing to be bought off ...

[Unbelive]

BCX said he has 19% of network hash rate.  

He estimated that 19% or perhaps less was required to do a timewarp.  He implied that he had enough.  That's a lower bound, not an upper bound, on his hash power, but it incorporates an unknown linear factor (the perhaps less factor).

The longer you run a timewarp attack, the more likely it is to succeed.  That scales linearly because each trial is independent.

so you're saying he needs 6mh/s to do a timewarp attack (assuming he's right about the 19%)?

edit:  do we know who owns the top 3 pools?  buying a pool might be cheaper than hashrate if the owner is willing to be bought off ...

Yes this is much better idea. Or better to rent it. He dont need to keep it forever. Just rent it for a few days.

[vuduchyld]

So if you're holding XMR and mining to a pool, it might make sense to solo mine?

And if you're holding and not mining, it might secure the network for you to set up mining, at least for a short time?

And if you're just mining, and mining to a pool, it might make sense to preserve the value of what you're mining by switching to solo?

[Jshank]

how easy is it to purchase cloud power? I may throw down some usd on tuesday. Links?

[evergrow]

So if you're holding XMR and mining to a pool, it might make sense to solo mine?

And if you're holding and not mining, it might secure the network for you to set up mining, at least for a short time?

And if you're just mining, and mining to a pool, it might make sense to preserve the value of what you're mining by switching to solo?

If theres a real successful full-blown attack it truly doesn't matter if you mine or not. The coin's network will then be broken and can only be revived with a hardfork, blockchain roll-back, patched new version of the Monero codebase. If the latter is not innovated quickly, Monero would be dead.

[rdnkjdi]

edit:  do we know who owns the top 3 pools?  buying a pool might be cheaper than hashrate if the owner is willing to be bought off ...

Was this ever answered?

[Unbelive]

So if you're holding XMR and mining to a pool, it might make sense to solo mine?

And if you're holding and not mining, it might secure the network for you to set up mining, at least for a short time?

And if you're just mining, and mining to a pool, it might make sense to preserve the value of what you're mining by switching to solo?

perfect is to solo mine. so if your pool goes off, is only you on it. if you are on bigger pool that goes off, many miners goes off. But if you mine on smaller pool is OK. Just try to avoid top few. And you already make network stronger.

[smooth]

how easy is it to purchase cloud power? I may throw down some usd on tuesday. Links?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=653467.msg8919354#msg8919354

[smooth]

So if you're holding XMR and mining to a pool, it might make sense to solo mine?

And if you're holding and not mining, it might secure the network for you to set up mining, at least for a short time?

And if you're just mining, and mining to a pool, it might make sense to preserve the value of what you're mining by switching to solo?

If theres a real successful full-blown attack it truly doesn't matter if you mine or not.

You are presuming there is a successful attack.

However, whether or not there is a successful attack may depend on whether you mine and how you mine. If you want to help support the coin, please mine it.

Best: Solo mine.

Better: Mine on small pool with backup pools configured.

Okay: Mine on big pool with backup pools configured.

Worst: Mine on big pool with no backup.

Solo mining is likely significantly better than the others given the possibility that an attack may compromise one or more pools and use their hash rate for the attack instead of just DDoSing them or fighting against them.

This all applies forever, not just in response to this immediate threat.