Join 47,382 users and earn money for participation

How Bitcoin Cash should defend against the hostile takeover attempt by rogue developer Amaury Séchet

12 210 exc boost
Avatar for ZakMcRofl
Written by   146
4 months ago

Now the Bitcoin Cash community knows where it stands.


In the last weeks, many major pools mining BCH vowed to defend Bitcoin Cash against the attempted hostile takeover of its community by Bitcoin ABC developer Amaury Séchet by switching over to the mining software BCHN or other alternatives.

Today, ViaBTC announced that they would "stay neutral" in the upcoming November 15th battle between BCH and the new Bitcoin ABC coin. However, upon further inquiry they admitted that they would let their customers choose if they want to mine using BCHN or Bitcoin ABC, with Bitcoin ABC being the default. That's not really being neutral...

Together with their sister company, Antpool, they represent around 30% of the BCH hashrate today. That is a minory but their implementation will make it very easy for BTC miners to temporariy use their hashrate against the BCH community. They would be acting against their own interests because they would effectively pay money to Bitcoin ABC forever if the IFP remains, but they might just do so out of spite.

To prevent a contentious November 15th fork, the community should now prepare its defense strategy. In this article I will propose some methods for discussion in the community.

1. Encourage miners to migrate from ViaBTC to other pools

We should make BTC and BCH miners aware that supporting ViaBTC (and maybe Antpool) means risking that their future profits will be reduced by the amount syphoned towards Bitcoin ABC. Staying on the ABC coin chain will also mean that they will likely lose all their mining profits by the time they can sell them in case the ABC chain loses.

ASICseer already showed how effective this can be. They issued a public user alert that resulted in their customer's hash power for ViaBTC fell from 50 petahash to 39 petahash within only 12 hours.

2. Educate businesses that a 70% majority of hashrate will move away from Bitcoin ABC

We need to educate businesses using Bitcoin Cash that they should replace Bitcoin ABC with BCHN in preparation for the upcoming upgrade. This will ensure that they stay on the majority chain.

3. Hold a coin vote

When the IFP was originally proposed, Bitcoin ABC claimed that it was requested by chinese miners. Once the community showed its universal disapproval, the chinese miners that presumably put the idea on the table quickly backed down from it and the proposal gained a 0% approval rate in the block vote.

This shows that the chinese miners care what the BCH community thinks about a proposal. Therefore, I propose that we should hold a coin vote regarding the future we want to see for Bitcoin Cash (IFP or Non-IFP). Every BCH gets one vote, results are tallied on a given day.

This would send a clear picture to them that the IFP is universally unpopular amongst coin holders.

While I do not have the skillset required to detail how such a vote would best be held, I believe it could be an important tool to judge community support for technical proposals, now and in the future.

4. Translate articles to chinese

As explained in the paragraph before, the chinese miners care about what the rest of the community thinks. But language can be a barrier. So we need to find a way to reach them better, for example by translating articles like this one to chinese.

5. Block other mining nodes from building upon Bitcoin ABC blocks

Currently, BCHN and other nodes would happily continue building upon blocks mined by Bitcoin ABC (including the 8% IFP fee). In the other direction, Bitcoin ABC would reject all blocks that do not send them money. This creates an unequal playing field.

To level the playing field, some community members (not developers) have suggested to outright blacklist the hardcoded Bitcoin ABC wallet address and rejecting transactions sending money to it or from it. This would however be problematic because it would demonstrate that Bitcoin Cash can blacklist addresses, a mechanism many governments and companies would be very interested in.

Others have pointed out that miners who disagree with developers stealing from the coinbase would likely manually reject any blocks that were mined using Bitcoin ABC. My proposal is to coordinate such an effort without forcing anyone to use it. Here is how it would work: all node developers would add the ability to load a list of "bad" blocks from a user chosen URL. If a block is on the list, the software would refuse to build upon it.

These lists would only be used in the event of an attack on the network. Miners would be free to use such a list or not, but it BCH is getting attacked, they may very well chose to. It could be a list maintained locally by their admin or some other entity that identifies hostile blocks.

This would allow nodes with shared interests to reject hostile attacks without touching the source code or manually rejecting blocks on every instance. This mechanism could not be used to enforce a transaction blacklist because there is no central authority maintaining these lists and it would not be economic for a miner to reject blocks based on some government blacklist.

Other ideas?

If you have more ideas on how we can have an easy transition in November, please let me know in the comments. I am also very curious to hear what you think about my suggestions.

17
$ 3.41
$ 1.81 from @TheRandomRewarder
$ 1.00 from @ErdoganTalk
$ 0.50 from @RanierDistantfellow
+ 1
Avatar for ZakMcRofl
Written by   146
4 months ago
Enjoyed this article?  Earn Bitcoin Cash by sharing it! Explain
...and you will also help the author collect more tips.

Comments

Nice..

$ 0.00
1 month ago

Your concern about building on ABC blocks seems exaggerated to me based on how I understand all of this to work. For instance:

*The hardfork is already scheduled for a specific block.

*ABC will NOT mine on any block after that which doesn't include the IFP transaction (so they can't attack a competing chain at a higher block).

*Any non-ABC block that doesn't include the IFP transaction will be orphaned by ABC miners as of that scheduled block (so mining on the post-hardfork ABC blocks is pointless).

*The invalidateblock CLI command in node software predates BCH (so there's no need for any new arbitrary code here).

Given these points, informed miners and mining pools simply need to invalidate the first post-fork block that includes the ABC transaction and they will indefinitely be on the non-ABC fork. All necessary "coordination" is built into the attack.

$ 0.00
4 months ago

3. Hold a coin vote

YES!! https://read.cash/@tula_s/briefly-on-governance-ff06770f extending @AskTheBMP for coin voting is probably the easiest way

$ 0.00
4 months ago

I have subscribed check on me too and subscribe back

$ 0.00
4 months ago

Nice

$ 0.00
4 months ago

I like your spirit, but this is wrong:

because they would effectively pay money to Bitcoin ABC forever if the IFP remains

No miner loses anything, the cut in block reward in the ard moné chain comes from reduced hashrate on that chain.

$ 0.00
4 months ago

Thats not true, because of the various difficulty adjustment methods. Simplifications: 1 block earns 1 Bitcoin/BCH, BTC is worth 10k, BCH 1k, the IFP is 10%.

Every 10 minutes, miners now earn 10k + 1k with a given hash rate.

Now the IFP gets introduced. Every 10 minues, miners now only earn 10k + 0.9k while the hash rate didn't change. BCH lost some of the security, true, but miners also earn 100€ less every 10 minutes. BCH lost around 10% of its hash rate but all the money generated came out of the pockets of all miners (BTC + BCH).

The same calculation with real values: 1 block earns 6.25 Bitcoin/BCH, BTC is worth 9960€, BCH 341€, the IFP is 8%. Earned today every 10 minutes: 9960 6.25 + 341 6.25 = 64381€ Earned after IFP every 10 minutes: 9960 6.25 + 341 6.25 * 0,92 = 64211€

Yes, it is "only" a loss of 0.3%. But if BCH rises compared to BTC, the effect would grow much bigger.

$ 0.00
4 months ago

There could be a small increase in hashpower on BTC, but less than (0.025 * 0.08) 0.2% , and it will not be forever, only in the timespan of the reinvestment cycle. It is too small to make a noticable difference for BTC

$ 0.00
4 months ago

yeah financially the miners are probably better off with IFP. need to address this in order to win them.

$ 0.00
4 months ago

Marginalizing the IFP-chain is the way to do it.

$ 0.00
4 months ago

how exactly? i hope you dont mean just on social media

$ 0.00
4 months ago

I am not much aware of the finer details of things happening but I can get a sense that things are in a volatile state right now and will continue to do so till 15 Nov. As a newbie I should also be concerned.

$ 0.00
4 months ago