Welcome Anonymous !

Login or Register

Search

User Menu

Login

AuroraSpjall

The official Auroracoin discussion board

stuck at block 84380?

Almenn umræða um allt sem tengist Auroracoin
- General discussion about the Auroracoin ecosystem

by molecular » 28 Dec 2014 10:32

my blockexporers AuroraCoind is stuck at 84380 (2014/12/28 05:32:08) (http://explorer.auroracoin.eu)

same with this one: https://aur.cryptocoins.at/explorer/chain/auroracoin

and this one: https://chainz.cryptoid.info/aur/

something's broken, I guess.
molecular
Lurker
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 28 Dec 2014 10:27

by Dinobotta » 28 Dec 2014 16:16

Looks like it is up to 84478 now. Did the mining halt at 84380 this morning?

When I was looking through the blockchain I came across this strange block full of transfers of 0,0001 aur: https://aur.cryptocoins.at/explorer/block/9beb21e890bf16c2d6ed83bd1a473175357e124cced33b8655f5de8b4779575c

Whats going on there? Is someone spamming the miners? There are a bunch of these blocks full of 0,0001 aur
"Lost coins only make everyone else’s coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone". Satoshi Nakamoto
Dinobotta
Dev team
 
Posts: 65
Joined: 05 Dec 2014 23:42

by molecular » 28 Dec 2014 21:36

that spamming is a different issue. Has been going on for a long time...

Indeed blockexplorer shows no block for a 7 hour period starting 12/28 12:53:

Image

I have no plausible explanation for this.

Anyone?
molecular
Lurker
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 28 Dec 2014 10:27

by LTEX » 29 Dec 2014 10:59

Seeds dropping with the rest of the sites?
A fool will only look at the finger, even if it points to paradise!
User avatar
LTEX
Dev team
 
Posts: 82
Joined: 06 Dec 2014 06:54
Location: The Netherlands

by Dinobotta » 29 Dec 2014 11:01

Perhaps the increase and drop in difficulty yesterday, from around 100 to 200 then back to ca. 100, is the reason for no blocks being mined during the decreasing in difficulty phase?

Mining difficulty can be seen here : http://www.coinwarz.com/cryptocurrency/coins/auroracoin
"Lost coins only make everyone else’s coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone". Satoshi Nakamoto
Dinobotta
Dev team
 
Posts: 65
Joined: 05 Dec 2014 23:42

by voytek » 29 Dec 2014 11:25

Dinobotta wrote:Perhaps the increase and drop in difficulty yesterday, from around 100 to 200 then back to ca. 100, is the reason for no blocks being mined during the decreasing in difficulty phase?


51% attack?
voytek
Lurker
 
Posts: 6
Joined: 22 Dec 2014 16:18

by Bimmerhead » 30 Dec 2014 23:52

Block generation grinding to a crawl once again.

Arrrrgh!
Bimmerhead
Dev team
 
Posts: 214
Joined: 06 Dec 2014 04:05

by sorin » 31 Dec 2014 08:18

I guess is a 'dust attack' in order to discourage miners.
User avatar
sorin
Newbie
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 06 Dec 2014 00:08

by molecular » 01 Jan 2015 12:12

sorin wrote:I guess is a 'dust attack' in order to discourage miners.


can you explain how a dust attack works?
molecular
Lurker
 
Posts: 7
Joined: 28 Dec 2014 10:27

by Skarfurinn » 01 Jan 2015 14:24

That would be the send to many problem we have been seeing on the blockchain.

This is where a attacker sends continuous micro transactions to spam the blockchain and it results in a bloated blockchain and it can seriously delay all transactions in the blockchain. Bitcoin and other coins have had to create a fix for this problem in the past.

Here is a quote from Bitcoin wiki regarding Bitcoin's weaknesses.
Spamming transactions
It is easy to send transactions to yourself repeatedly. If these transactions fill blocks to the maximum size (1MB), other transactions would be delayed until the next block.

This is made expensive by the fees that would be required after the 50KB of free transactions per block are exhausted. An attacker will eventually eliminate free transactions, but Bitcoin fees will always be low because raising fees above 0.01 BTC per KB would require spending transaction fees. An attacker will eventually run out of money. Even if an attacker wants to waste money, transactions are further prioritised by the time since the coins were last spent, so attacks spending the same coins repeatedly are less effective.


Many coins have had this problem it seems.
Here is a Dogecoin reddit thread about this problem.
http://www.reddit.com/r/dogecoin/comments/1tc7ul/serious_shibes_we_have_a_dust_problem

This might affect the network greatly as hashing power and nodes are limited at this time.

I think this might be a Sybil attack in combination with dust attack and possibly kind of DoS attack which is serious.

Sybil attack
An attacker can attempt to fill the network with clients controlled by him, you would then be very likely to connect only to attacker nodes. Although Bitcoin never uses a count of nodes for anything completely isolating a node from the honest network can be helpful in the execution of other attacks.

This state can be exploited in (at least) the following ways:

The attacker can refuse to relay blocks and transactions from everyone, disconnecting you from the network.
The attacker can relay only blocks that he creates, putting you on a separate network. You're then open to double-spending attacks.
If you rely on transactions with 0 confirmations, the attacker can just filter out certain transactions to execute a double-spending attack.
Low-latency encryption/anonymization of Bitcoin's transmissions (With Tor, JAP, etc.) can be defeated relatively easy with a timing attack if you're connected to several of the attacker's nodes and the attacker is watching your transmissions at your ISP.
Bitcoin makes these attacks more difficult by only making an outbound connection to one IP address per /16 (x.y.0.0). Incoming connections are unlimited and unregulated, but this is generally only a problem in the anonymity case, where you're probably already unable to accept incoming connections.

Looking for suspiciously low network hash-rates may help prevent the second one.


Bitcoin has implemented a lot of protection from these kind of attacks but Auroracoin is currently built on old Litecoin code so it's highly likely that these guards are not in place here making the coin more vulnerable.

I don't know if these attacks might have created the delay that we saw in the claims making the claims come through when the claiming site was offline but it might be worth considering. Someone with a better understanding of the blockchain and the core code than me would have to answer that though.

This clearly makes updating the coin to the latest Bitcoin core the highest priority we have.
I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Skarfurinn
Dev team
 
Posts: 228
Joined: 04 Dec 2014 22:30
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland

by Bimmerhead » 01 Jan 2015 14:42

Bimmerhead
Dev team
 
Posts: 214
Joined: 06 Dec 2014 04:05

by Skarfurinn » 01 Jan 2015 15:44

Yes most likely. The dust started right after this.
I would have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time. - Blaise Pascal
User avatar
Skarfurinn
Dev team
 
Posts: 228
Joined: 04 Dec 2014 22:30
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland

by sorin » 02 Jan 2015 14:00

Skarfurinn wrote:Yes most likely. The dust started right after this.


I totaly agree that right now, the moist important project is no other than the blockchain security.
If the selling preasure continue at this rate, i expect the hashing power to go even lower. Right now the only option I see, is a cloud mining contract with cex, gash or other provider, ready to kick in just to mentain the network security until a better fix is found.
User avatar
sorin
Newbie
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 06 Dec 2014 00:08


Return to Umræðan (General)