51% Attack

https://miningpoolstats.stream/monero

I guess the operators of Nanopool are really good guys deciding not to do a double spend attack on the network while having more than 55% of the total hashrate đź« 

Why don’t miners want to use the P2Pool even though it strengthens the network and also has great incentives like zero fees with a very low payout threshold?

14 points · 9 comments · view on lemmy.world

9 Comments

monerobull@monero.town · 8 pts · 3y (5 replies)

Having 55% of hash doesn't mean you'll make profit by attempting a doublespend. I don't see how you could gain more from one and dumping the assets price + your reputation as a pool than by just behaving and passively collecting your fees forever. Nobody event talks about how 1 or 2 pools control 70% of zcash hash (although that's probably because nobody uses it) and even BTC has 2-3 companies (not even proper pools) controlling the majority of the hashrate.

It sounds scary but there really isn't that much a non-malicious, profit-driven pool could even do. Even a malicious pool could at worst mine empty blocks for a while.

wrs369@monero.town · 4 pts · 3y (1 reply)

It's definitely not ideal though, P2Pool is right there.

monerobull@monero.town · 1 pts · 3y

Very true. I am sad that p2pool only has so little hash :(

max@nano.garden · 1 pts · 3y

Having 55% of hash doesn’t mean you’ll make profit by attempting a doublespend

But a pool could be turned into a malicious pool by an adversary that takes control of it. A clear disadvantages of centralization is that it creates a single point of failure.

Even a malicious pool could at worst mine empty blocks for a while.

Why is this the case? I still have not studied the Monero protocol yet.

4rkal@monero.town · 1 pts · 2y (1 reply)

Shorting Monero and then attacking would most probably be the most profitable.

IP2@monero.town · 1 pts · 2y

I doubt anyone could be that certain his attack will work. Especially mining on a public pool, it is likely destined to fail.

NonDollarCurrency@monero.town · 5 pts · 3y (1 reply)

I'd hazard a guess that botnets and cryptominer worms cause the uptick in network hashrate for the centralized pools because it's easy to point hundreds of thousands of machines to 1 large pool.

wrs369@monero.town · 5 pts · 3y

Either way, it's not great.

thecam@lemmy.world · 0 pts · 3y

Do nanopool users know they have a majority?