跳到內容
  • home
  • News
  • How to
  • Coin information
  • Bot Lab
  • General Discussion
  • 最新
  • 熱門
  • 標籤
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • 預設 (未使用主題設計)
  • 未使用主題設計
Collapse

Coinsori

  1. 首頁
  2. News
  3. Bitcoin Researcher Explains Why Block Reorg Was Not Malicious Attack

Bitcoin Researcher Explains Why Block Reorg Was Not Malicious Attack

已排程 已置頂 已鎖定 已移動 News
1 貼文 1 Posters 1 瀏覽
  • 從舊到新
  • 從新到舊
  • 最多點贊
回覆
  • 在新貼文中回覆
登入後回覆
此主題已被刪除。只有擁有主題管理權限的使用者可以查看。
  • K 離線
    K 離線
    kim
    編寫 最後由 編輯
    #1

    Following a rare two-block reorganization on the Bitcoin network that saw Foundry USA orchestrate a massive seven-block winning streak, fears of foul play began circulating within the community.

    However, a Bitcoin researcher has stepped in to debunk the rumors.

    The anomaly was simply expected network behavior rather than a coordinated "selfish-mining" attack.

    Race at height 941880

    As reported by U.Today, the network briefly split into two competing chains at block height 941880.

    AntPool mined block 941881, and this was followed up with block 941882 on that same path by ViaBTC.

    Simultaneously, Foundry USA mined its own versions of blocks 941881 and 941882.

    The network briefly had two valid chains of equal length until Foundry USA broke the tie by continuing its streak, mining blocks 941883, 941884 and 941885.

    This resulted in the AntPool and ViaBTC blocks being orphaned. The Foundry ended up being the victor of an epic seven-block run.

    Selfish mining theory, debunked

    Foundry seemingly materialized multiple blocks to overtake its competitors, and for some, the knee-jerk reaction was to accuse the pool of "selfish mining."

    A theoretical attack would involve a miner intentionally withholding valid blocks from the public network to gain a head start on finding the next block, ultimately wasting the hash power of competing pools.

    According to the researcher, the data does not support this malicious narrative. If Foundry was attempting a selfish-mining attack, it was executed extremely poorly, given that the economic incentives were terrible.

    It is worth noting that the event took place during a low-fee period. The two reorganized blocks only netted Foundry an infinitesimal 0.025 BTC in transaction fees.

    Furthermore, on-chain data shows that Foundry actually spent a second mining on top of the AntPool and ViaBTC blocks before switching back to its own chain. A miner intentionally withholding a secret chain would not act this way.

    The researcher attributes the event to standard network latency and the use of specific Bitcoin Core commands.

    source: https://www.tradingview.com/news/u_today:615adaf63094b:0-bitcoin-researcher-explains-why-block-reorg-was-not-malicious-attack/

    1 條回覆 最後回覆
    0

    Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.

    Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.

    With your input, this post could be even better 💗

    註冊 登入
    回覆
    • 在新貼文中回覆
    登入後回覆
    • 從舊到新
    • 從新到舊
    • 最多點贊


    • 登入

    • 沒有帳戶? 註冊

    • Login or register to search.
    Powered by NodeBB Contributors
    • 第一個貼文
      最後的貼文
    0
    • home
    • News
    • How to
    • Coin information
    • Bot Lab
    • General Discussion
    • 最新
    • 熱門
    • 標籤