From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VeBq9-0003VN-7P for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 06 Nov 2013 22:44:45 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from entix.nl ([178.22.57.40] helo=mail.entix.nl) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1VeBq7-0001IS-3W for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 06 Nov 2013 22:44:45 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.entix.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D5AD308CDF for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 23:19:45 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail.entix.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (entix.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OcQAC3QVtMUH for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 23:19:43 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.1.106] (535608E7.cm-6-7a.dynamic.ziggo.nl [83.86.8.231]) by mail.entix.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4A5A3308CD7 for ; Wed, 6 Nov 2013 23:19:43 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <527AC07E.5030401@bitonic.nl> Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 23:19:42 +0100 From: Jouke Hofman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <5279D49D.5050807@jerviss.org> In-Reply-To: <5279D49D.5050807@jerviss.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: doubleclick.net] X-Headers-End: 1VeBq7-0001IS-3W Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] we can all relax now X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 22:44:45 -0000 bounty++ On 06-11-13 06:33, kjj wrote: > One of the things that really gets me going is when someone devises a > model, tests it against itself, and then pretends that they've learned > something about the real world. > > Naturally, the Selfish Mining paper is exactly this sort of nonsense. > Their model is one with no latency, and one where the attacker has total > visibility across the network. An iterated FSM is not a suitable > simulation of the bitcoin system. The bitcoin network does not have > states, and to the extent that you can pretend that we do, you can't > simulate transitions between them with static probabilities. > > The authors understand this deep down inside, even though they didn't > work out the implications. They handwave the issue by assuming a total > sybil attack, and in true academic spirit, they don't realize that the > condition necessary for the attack is far, far worse than the attack itself. > > Greg said he'd like to run some simulations, and I'm thinking about it > too. Unfortunately, he is busy all week, and I'm lazy (and also busy > for most of tomorrow). > > If neither of us get to it first, I'm willing to pitch in 1 BTC as a > bounty for building a general bitcoin network simulator framework. The > simulator should be able to account for latency between nodes, and > ideally within a node. It needs to be able to simulate an attacker that > owns varying fractions of the network, and make decisions based only on > what the attacker actually knows. It needs to be able to simulate this > "attack" and should be generic enough to be easily modified for other > crazy schemes. > > (Bounty offer is serious, but expires in one year [based on the earliest > timestamp that my mail server puts on this email], and /may/ be subject > to change if the price on any reputable exchange breaks 1000 USD per BTC > in that period.) > > Basically, the lack of a decent network simulator is what allowed this > paper to get press. If the author had been able to see the importance > of the stuff he was ignoring, we wouldn't be wasting so much time > correcting him (and sadly the reporters that have no way to check his > claims). > > https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=324413.msg3495663#msg3495663 > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers > Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore > techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most > from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >