Pool Manager Fraud?

[Geremia]

A pro miner I know, who outputs 2+ ptaHash/sec, said to me "Every major pool had been caught with their hand in the cookie jar."

Is this true? Which pools should I avoid, due to their managers being fraudulent?

[1714923200]

1714923200

[1714923200]

1714923200

[1714923200]

1714923200

[loshia]

I can recomend following pools the order is random
Bitminter
Kano
Btcguild

Because I trust the people who run the pools. That is a personal opinion of course

I will avoid at any cost a Antpool,  f2pool and so on. I am talking about all CHINESE pools in general

If you feel brave you can go solo take all or nothing you got the jar and the honey if you are lucky

P2pool is ok also but you will face "jar" unrelated issues there....

[Geremia]

I will avoid at any cost a Antpool

My friend uses AntPool, but doesn't truest Eligius for some reason…

[loshia]

I will avoid at any cost a Antpool

My friend uses AntPool, but doesn't truest Eligius for some reason…

As I said it is up to you to decide.....
That is all I can say....
All of the above is just my personal opinion.
Not mentioning a particular pool in my list does just means I have no impressions from pool and I have not used it.but once again important part is what to avoid in my oppinion 
Good luck to you

[cathoderay]

I can recomend following pools the order is random
Bitminter
Kano
Btcguild

Because I trust the people who run the pools. That is a personal opinion of course

Good choices. I'll add to that list of pools to avoid:

BAN
Ghash.io

Both got caught with their pants down......

[rkinnin]

I pro miner I know, who outputs 2+ ptaHash/sec, said to me "Every major pool had been caught with their hand in the cookie jar."

Is this true? Which pools should I avoid, due to their managers being fraudulent?

I have been mining for a year now, two weeks ago.

What I have noticed is that most Pool Mgrs are part-timers. 

I am curious.....what financial benefit does a reputable pool manager get for their efforts??

[bhanu545]

I tried almost all the famous pools and i can say pool managers can steal if they want to without getting caught. Everyone has their own versions on the pools they use. So, try yourself and stick to any pool you like. Earnings are mainly affected by pools badluck, good luck. About pool owners stealing candy, no one can trace them you can consider it as a donation if they are really stealing because, all you can do is nothing 

[OgNasty]

I trust these guys.   

[Meuh6879]

Trust no-one ... use P2Pool. 
Easy.

[kano]

Trust no-one ... use P2Pool. 
Easy.

Just remember to setup a good p2pool mining setup as good as the best ones on p2pool.
Otherwise the other miners on p2pool with a better setup are taking some of your BTC ...

[sgk]

BAN
Ghash.io

Both got caught with their pants down......

I'm not aware of what happened with Ghash.io

Can you please elaborate?

[organofcorti]

I pro miner I know, who outputs 2+ ptaHash/sec, said to me "Every major pool had been caught with their hand in the cookie jar."

Is this true? Which pools should I avoid, due to their managers being fraudulent?

This is bullshit. If I were you I'd ask for proof, but I don't think your friend has any chance of providing it. It was probably just hyperbola on his part.

[IYFTech]

I'm not aware of what happened with Ghash.io

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=327767.0

[armedmilitia]

I recommend slush, they're the first mining pool ever, still running today.
They have a 2% fee, but they're pretty stable. And low variance too because they have a pretty big market share. (5%)

[Geremia]

Trust no-one ... use P2Pool. 
Easy.

Wow, thank you for bringing P2Pool to my attention. I'd never heard of it before, but it's an ingenious idea.

What do you mean:

Just remember to setup a good p2pool mining setup as good as the best ones on p2pool.
Otherwise the other miners on p2pool with a better setup are taking some of your BTC ...

?

[jonnybravo0311]

Trust no-one ... use P2Pool.  
Easy.

Wow, thank you for bringing P2Pool to my attention. I'd never heard of it before, but it's an ingenious idea.

What do you mean:

Just remember to setup a good p2pool mining setup as good as the best ones on p2pool.
Otherwise the other miners on p2pool with a better setup are taking some of your BTC ...

?

Kano means that you need to setup your node and ensure it has decent hardware... Is connected to other widely connected nodes... Is ideally on the same network as your mining hardware... You want to ensure that you get as few dead/orphan shares as possible and that you have a low DOA rate.  The better connected you are the better your chances of being successful in submitting viable shares and reaping the full rewards when a block is found.

Also ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.  The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

[kano]

Trust no-one ... use P2Pool.  
Easy.

Wow, thank you for bringing P2Pool to my attention. I'd never heard of it before, but it's an ingenious idea.

What do you mean:

Just remember to setup a good p2pool mining setup as good as the best ones on p2pool.
Otherwise the other miners on p2pool with a better setup are taking some of your BTC ...

?

... and to add more explanation
A share on the p2pool share chain is pretty much the same as a block on the Bitcoin block chain.
You don't send out a p2pool share and get it every time.
If 2 p2pool shares are sent out, built off the same previous p2pool share, one of them will not be paid.
Add on top of that, the p2pool share chain averages a new share every ~30s instead of ~600s like the block chain, so network connectivity and latency has 20x the effect.

For the Bitcoin block chain, to get the least block orphans, a pool (or solo) must ensure it is well connected, has low block distribution latency to the rest of the bitcoin network, is able to process incoming shares quickly, and, of course, the pool itself isn't struggling to get enough CPU for bitcoind

Thus on p2pool the same issue exists with p2pool share chain shares.
The p2pool nodes with the same attributes above will lose fewer shares.
When you notice that something like 10% of p2pool shares are DOA/Stale you need to realise that is only the average.
So if someone is consistently getting 5% DOA/Stale due to having a good setup, that means 95% of their work is being paid instead of only 90% like the p2pool average.
i.e. they get a better share of each block for the work they submit.

Every new share on the p2pool share chain means you need your p2pool to know about it as quickly as possible and switch your miners to the new work based on the latest successful share in the share chain.
Any delays with those ~30s p2pool share chain updates and that delay represents how much time of the ~30s average you are hashing work that wont be paid.
Using a remote p2pool, of course, exacerbates the latency issue due to the ~30s average.
Using a miner that takes time to switch work also makes that a problem since it is all about what % of ~30s you are working on the latest p2pool share chain share.

...
Also ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.  The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

~95% of DOA/Stale shares on p2pool that are also blocks, are valid bitcoin blocks.

[Mikestang]

Trust no-one ... use P2Pool.  
Easy.

Wow, thank you for bringing P2Pool to my attention. I'd never heard of it before, but it's an ingenious idea.

What do you mean:

Just remember to setup a good p2pool mining setup as good as the best ones on p2pool.
Otherwise the other miners on p2pool with a better setup are taking some of your BTC ...

?

... and to add more explanation
A share on the p2pool share chain is pretty much the same as a block on the Bitcoin block chain.
You don't send out a p2pool share and get it every time.
If 2 p2pool shares are sent out, built off the same previous p2pool share, one of them will not be paid.
Add on top of that, the p2pool share chain averages a new share every ~30s instead of ~600s like the block chain, so network connectivity and latency has 20x the effect.

For the Bitcoin block chain, to get the least block orphans, a pool (or solo) must ensure it is well connected, has low block distribution latency to the rest of the bitcoin network, is able to process incoming shares quickly, and, of course, the pool itself isn't struggling to get enough CPU for bitcoind

Thus on p2pool the same issue exists with p2pool share chain shares.
The p2pool nodes with the same attributes above will lose fewer shares.
When you notice that something like 10% of p2pool shares are DOA/Stale you need to realise that is only the average.
So if someone is consistently getting 5% DOA/Stale due to having a good setup, that means 95% of their work is being paid instead of only 90% like the p2pool average.
i.e. they get a better share of each block for the work they submit.

Every new share on the p2pool share chain means you need your p2pool to know about it as quickly as possible and switch your miners to the new work based on the latest successful share in the share chain.
Any delays with those ~30s p2pool share chain updates and that delay represents how much time of the ~30s average you are hashing work that wont be paid.
Using a remote p2pool, of course, exacerbates the latency issue due to the ~30s average.
Using a miner that takes time to switch work also makes that a problem since it is all about what % of ~30s you are working on the latest p2pool share chain share.

...
Also ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.  The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

~95% of DOA/Stale shares on p2pool that are also blocks, are valid bitcoin blocks.

And this is why I mine in Kano's pool, the fact that he took the time to explain how another pool functions (not because of how p2pool operates).  You have to trust the people who run the pool, otherwise you could be short changing yourself.

[Geremia]

A share on the p2pool share chain is pretty much the same as a block on the Bitcoin block chain.

Conceptually, but certainly not difficulty-wise.

[Geremia]

ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.

Yes, bfgminer, for example, has the option "--submit-stale".

The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

Why does "The standard firmware on Ants for example discards" stale shares?

[jonnybravo0311]

ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.

Yes, bfgminer, for example, has the option "--submit-stale".

The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

Why does "The standard firmware on Ants for example discards" stale shares?

Um, because Bitmain's fork of cgminer is terrible.  That's why kano and ck wrote their own binaries for a bunch of different Antminer models.

[kano]

ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.

Yes, bfgminer, for example, has the option "--submit-stale".

The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

Why does "The standard firmware on Ants for example discards" stale shares?

Um, because Bitmain's fork of cgminer is terrible.  That's why kano and ck wrote their own binaries for a bunch of different Antminer models.

It's also enabled by default in the master cgminer to submit stale shares.
There's no real reason to actually disable it since each pool will have it's own rules about when a share is stale and 2nd guessing every pool is a bad idea.
Submitting stale shares shouldn't be a problem either on any good pool

[ilovecoinZ]

I think as a rule if you find lots of miners using a particular pool, the chances of it being safe are high.

That being said owners circumstances can change which them may influence their honesty.

Its a lottery really but a little homework puts the odds in your favour!

[BCwinning]

I recommend slush, they're the first mining pool ever, still running today.
They have a 2% fee, but they're pretty stable. And low variance too because they have a pretty big market share. (5%)

I don't If you want to pay a fee than use btcguild and earn namecoin in the process as well.
Plus they have more hashrate. Slush needs to either start the merge mining back up or drop his fee.
Personally I think 2% is greedy. especially if they also take the transaction fee.

[sloopy]

I recommend slush, they're the first mining pool ever, still running today.
They have a 2% fee, but they're pretty stable. And low variance too because they have a pretty big market share. (5%)

I don't If you want to pay a fee than use btcguild and earn namecoin in the process as well.
Plus they have more hashrate. Slush needs to either start the merge mining back up or drop his fee.
Personally I think 2% is greedy. especially if they also take the transaction fee.

I think btcguild is ran by a good pool operator, but the Namecoin I made is still sitting in my offline storage because it was so insignificant.
Can you actually still register a name and use it with NMC? Do most just dump it?

Ofcourse I since moved most hash to kano.is and call it 'luck', but my payouts are much higher. I was with the guild for a couple of months, and now Kano for a couple. So not a long term comparison, but I'll say it is a great data point for me.

One thing I never understood is what the groups are accomplishing at the Guild. Or "teams", I should say. Although I joined one to look at stats. 

[sloopy]

ensure that your miners are submitting stale shares.

Yes, bfgminer, for example, has the option "--submit-stale".

The standard firmware on Ants for example discards them... Even though they may be valid solutions for a block.

Why does "The standard firmware on Ants for example discards" stale shares?

Um, because Bitmain's fork of cgminer is terrible.  That's why kano and ck wrote their own binaries for a bunch of different Antminer models.

Do you or anyone know the "core devs" at BITMAIN? The people who handle the pool code and firmware? It would be interesting to hear their opinions on their implementation(s) and understand how many of them there are. I would assume BITMAIN have deep pockets and from there assume they would have cutting edge developers working on pool software full time. Especially since they mine with our products for a long time prior to shipping. Hell even when you receive a miner from their repair shop they have set it back to mine at their pools.

I would always stay away from a mining company's pool. Unless they hired CK and Kano, then I might follow them for the simple transparency they seem to bring to the table. I know transparency is a buzz word in our community, but I like the fact they explain things on a different level and pay attention to the community. If I screwup they tell me, and if I do well they tell me, but mainly it is the fact they communicate well, so the "telling me" part I like. Sorry Kano and CK if I bug you too much

That is expected of a pool operator though isn't it? "Transparency" in the forms of operations and communication. 

[DrHaribo]

from there assume they would have cutting edge developers

It's not enough to be good at programming, you have to know how the domain (bitcoin mining) works as well. There are plenty of horrible mining client implementations. Things like using a 32-bit integer to hold the difficulty, resulting in accidental block withholding attacks. Or making the user select the difficulty to mine at (and throwing away most of your work) instead of implementing the stratum protocol correctly and listening to the server when it tells you the difficulty. Or taking forever (and producing huge amounts of stale work) when the server tells you to immediately flush old work data and start on new data. Or throwing away stale work instead of passing it to the server.

When a developer who is new to bitcoin touches mining code I am frequently surprised at how bad the results are. It's as if there is no testing or quality control.

That is expected of a pool operator though isn't it? "Transparency" in the forms of operations and communication. 

One would hope so. But the reality is much worse.

As one of the biggest pools used their hashpower to scam and steal from a dice game, very few of their miners left them.

As the biggest pool grew too big (centralizing too much hashpower) and refused to do anything about it, very few of their miners moved their hashpower.

When new pools offer 10% or even 40% extra mining income, or investment opportunities offer 7% gains per week, people queue to sign up. If you ask for transparency they get mad at you because they think you are trying to ruin the good deal for them.

Please. I am quickly turning into a bitter old man. Those of you who are still asking questions and demanding transparency and responsible behavior - you are my last hope. 

[Geremia]

How is "pool manager fraud" even possible?

[Geremia]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

[-ck]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) are immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

[Geremia]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

How could the manager of a non-P2Pool that pays its miners via the generation transaction claim some or all of a freshly-minted coin?

[-ck]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

How could the manager of a non-P2Pool that pays its miners via the generation transaction claim some or all of a freshly-minted coin?

By not including your quota in the generation..

[bigbitmine]

I recommend slush, they're the first mining pool ever, still running today.
They have a 2% fee, but they're pretty stable. And low variance too because they have a pretty big market share. (5%)

I'm with Slush.  Happy with it but the conspiracy part of my brain will never truly trust anyone.

[Geremia]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

How could the manager of a non-P2Pool that pays its miners via the generation transaction claim some or all of a freshly-minted coin?

By not including your quota in the generation..

But isn't that part of the mined block? They can't fudge around with that once it's mined…

[Geremia]

Bitmain's fork of cgminer is terrible.

Is there a way to easily update `cgminer` on AntMiners?

[-ck]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

How could the manager of a non-P2Pool that pays its miners via the generation transaction claim some or all of a freshly-minted coin?

By not including your quota in the generation..

But isn't that part of the mined block? They can't fudge around with that once it's mined…

Do you deconstruct the data sent to your mining hardware to know what you're mining?

[Geremia]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

How could the manager of a non-P2Pool that pays its miners via the generation transaction claim some or all of a freshly-minted coin?

By not including your quota in the generation..

But isn't that part of the mined block? They can't fudge around with that once it's mined…

Do you deconstruct the data sent to your mining hardware to know what you're mining?

I don't understand what or why you're asking this.

I think I have answered my own question:
These pool managers could simply refuse to include you in the payout queue. P2Pool is immune to that sort of fraud, certainly.

[-ck]

But isn't that part of the mined block? They can't fudge around with that once it's mined…

Do you deconstruct the data sent to your mining hardware to know what you're mining?

I don't understand what or why you're asking this.

Because that's the only way you'd be able to confirm that it's actually part of the mined block before it's mined.

There is also nothing that stops them putting less than you deserve into the blocks you are mining while you are mining them. You'd have to audit the pool hashrate somehow accurately and track each and every payout no differently to any other payout scheme.

[jonnybravo0311]

Are pools in which the miners are paid via the generation transaction (e.g., Eligius, puddinpop) immune to fraud?

Not in the slightest, no.

How could the manager of a non-P2Pool that pays its miners via the generation transaction claim some or all of a freshly-minted coin?

By not including your quota in the generation..

But isn't that part of the mined block? They can't fudge around with that once it's mined…

Do you deconstruct the data sent to your mining hardware to know what you're mining?

I don't understand what or why you're asking this.

He's stating that unless you're examining the data being sent to your miner how would you know?  You still have to create transactions to distribute the block reward and that data is part of what your miner is trying to find the hash.  So unless you're looking at exactly what data your miner is hashing you wouldn't know.  Of course even if you did you'd still have to determine the fraudulent distribution.

As you can see miners place a bit of faith in the pool operators

[Geremia]

Because that's the only way you'd be able to confirm that it's actually part of the mined block before it's mined.

There is also nothing that stops them putting less than you deserve into the blocks you are mining while you are mining them. You'd have to audit the pool hashrate somehow accurately and track each and every payout no differently to any other payout scheme.

Yes, that's what I meant when I said it's 100% up to these pools' managers as to whether you're included in the payout queue.

He's stating that unless you're examining the data being sent to your miner how would you know?  You still have to create transactions to distribute the block reward and that data is part of what your miner is trying to find the hash.  So unless you're looking at exactly what data your miner is hashing you wouldn't know.  Of course even if you did you'd still have to determine the fraudulent distribution.

As you can see miners place a bit of faith in the pool operators

indeed
thanks for the clarifications, guys

[mrhelpful]

In my days of mining when like 2013, and BFL was still the hype.

I actually mined a good month with my BFL 5ghs using bitminter, and actually saw no problems at all and havent been cheated.  Saw a solid .1 btc produced so I expect the same now if I decided to use their pool today with same results.

Bitminter is also more user-friendly in my observation if you are not super technical. Also allows to use on MAC`s if you have one, which most havent done.

[Geremia]

Here's an interesting paper that documents Wafflepool's fraud:
http://www.secureworks.com/cyber-threat-intelligence/threats/bgp-hijacking-for-cryptocurrency-profit/

[kano]

Here's an interesting paper that documents Wafflepool's fraud:
http://www.secureworks.com/cyber-threat-intelligence/threats/bgp-hijacking-for-cryptocurrency-profit/

Not really pool manager fraud - it was done by the owner of the account on the pool that people weren't mining to but got redirected to.
That was a stratum redirect attack that I soon afterwards disabled in cgminer.
https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/commit/040b42c5c6596046a3621a73616f2babe4ae0bd2
Of course many miners were still running forks of cgminer and didn't update so were susceptible to this problem for a long time after that.