1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>) id 1UO2yt-0001r7-35
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 05 Apr 2013 09:30:47 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.217.181 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.217.181; envelope-from=melvincarvalho@gmail.com;
helo=mail-lb0-f181.google.com;
Received: from mail-lb0-f181.google.com ([209.85.217.181])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UO2yr-0001PO-9z
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 05 Apr 2013 09:30:47 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f181.google.com with SMTP id r11so3538931lbv.40
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 05 Apr 2013 02:30:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.125.198 with SMTP id ms6mr5598564lbb.48.1365154238526;
Fri, 05 Apr 2013 02:30:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.143.38 with HTTP; Fri, 5 Apr 2013 02:30:38 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 11:30:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKaEYhLqnzrhdJNTSBccDA68Mb-hUnaZaCa9Gn43FuVpa410sg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01161a94737c2804d999bdf8
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(melvincarvalho[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1UO2yr-0001PO-9z
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] A mining pool at 46%
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2013 09:30:47 -0000
--089e01161a94737c2804d999bdf8
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
There was some chat on IRC about a mining pool reaching 46%
http://blockchain.info/pools
What's the risk of a 51% attack.
I suggested that the pool itself is decentralized so you could not launch
one
On IRC people were saying that the pool owner gets to choose what goes in
the block
Surely with random non colliding nonces, it would be almost impossible to
coordinate a 51% even by the owner
Someone came back and said that creating random numbers on a GPU is hard.
But what about just creating ONE random number and incrementing from there
...
It would be great to know if this is a threat or a non issue
--089e01161a94737c2804d999bdf8
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div><div><div>There was some chat on IRC about =
a mining pool reaching 46%<br><br><a href=3D"http://blockchain.info/pools">=
http://blockchain.info/pools</a><br><br></div>What's the risk of a 51% =
attack.<br>
<br></div>I suggested that the pool itself is decentralized so you could no=
t launch one<br><br>On IRC people were saying that the pool owner gets to c=
hoose what goes in the block<br><br></div>Surely with random non colliding =
nonces, it would be almost impossible to coordinate a 51% even by the owner=
<br>
<br></div>Someone came back and said that creating random numbers on a GPU =
is hard.=A0 But what about just creating ONE random number and incrementing=
from there ...<br><br></div><div>It would be great to know if this is a th=
reat or a non issue<br>
</div></div>
--089e01161a94737c2804d999bdf8--
|
