public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr•org>
To: Peter Vessenes <peter@coinlab•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Defeating the block withholding attack
Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 02:04:55 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <201206040204.57503.luke@dashjr.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMGNxUu7SbnfpU8L+qp7KUmFLSU=VqcYGu2GhzRaYhkTT3Nz7A@mail.gmail.com>

On Monday, June 04, 2012 1:43:42 AM Peter Vessenes wrote:
> Does it have asymmetric payoff for an attacker, that is, over time does it
> pay them more to spend their hashes attacking than just mining?

That depends on the pool's reward scheme. Some complicated forms are capable 
of getting "bonus" earnings out of the pool. Under all systems, the attacker 
at least gains the "hurt the pool" benefit. Given the frequency of DDoS 
attacks on pools, it is clear there are people who will even pay for attacks 
that provide no other benefit than harming pools. Under all systems, the 
attacker doesn't lose out in any significant way.

> My gut is that it pays less well than mining, meaning I think this is
> likely a small problem in the aggregate, and certainly not something we
> should try and fork the blockchain for until there's real pain.

If we wait until there's real pain, it will be a painful fork. If we plan it 
1-2 years out, people have time to upgrade on their own before it breaks.

> Consider, for instance, whether it pays better than just mining bitcoins
> and spending those on 'bonuses' for getting users to switch from a pool you
> hate.

With this attack, attackers can hurt the pool's "luck factor" *and* spend the 
bitcoins they earn to bribe users away.



  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-04  2:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-06-03  0:52 Luke-Jr
     [not found] ` <CACsn0c=+xrVvGMAkPZffpVhRcAc09RuOW7LeOwi0TOD88VbuqQ@mail.gmail.com>
2012-06-03  3:40   ` [Bitcoin-development] Fwd: " Watson Ladd
2012-06-04  1:43 ` [Bitcoin-development] " Peter Vessenes
2012-06-04  2:04   ` Luke-Jr [this message]
2012-06-04 20:49     ` Mike Koss
2012-06-04 21:05       ` Luke-Jr
2012-06-05  0:00         ` Mike Koss
2012-06-05  1:05           ` Luke-Jr

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=201206040204.57503.luke@dashjr.org \
    --to=luke@dashjr$(echo .)org \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
    --cc=peter@coinlab$(echo .)com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox