Under Attack Again
-
Nevermind Will edit in the morning
-
[quote name=“wrapper0feather” post=“22468” timestamp=“1374389156”]
Very interesting, what does the code say if the Block is in the past? As per the current block time anomalies?re: Why does Block 53872 has a time before block 53871?
[/quote]It’s allowed if within limits. There may be some clock drift, though servers are supposed to synchronise their clocks through NTP at least daily.
-
[quote name=“111111111111111111111” post=“22476” timestamp=“1374395173”]
FTC appears to be under attack again, just a heads up.
[/quote]That’s not an attack. The difficulty has decreased recently from 104.66 to 74.01, so profitability vs. BTC is 250%.
-
Here’s the latest chart’s showing the additional “coins mining days per day”, above what should have been mined. The red bars are from the change in block production, during attack. The blue shows where it has fallen back to currently.
I think there are still too many injected blocks in the “current condition”. I’ll retest later and see if indicates a more subtle attack, or if it is just due to lag in the difficulty change compensating for hash rate variability.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Big Vern dropped us again about 40 mins ago.
His tweet “FTC trade paid is suspended again due to an attack that has broken the chain again.” -
[quote name=“Pyxis” post=“22502” timestamp=“1374413062”]
Big Vern dropped us again about 40 mins ago.
His tweet “FTC trade paid is suspended again due to an attack that has broken the chain again.”
[/quote]Was only for a brief period while I checked out some stats. It was put back online quickly.
BigVern
-
Help, I think we are under attack again. Some addresses are getting impossible block rates, and my mining has gone to zero.
eg.? 6oXrGm4vwKUhqQR1hJaCMZoi2Eh7Weu2RW
1660a2cc29… 54421 2013-07-21 13:38:39 200 68400.66264736 FTC
6342aceef3… 54424 2013-07-21 13:47:18 200 68600.66264736 FTC
c9bb2291d0… 54425 2013-07-21 13:47:19 200 68800.66264736 FTC
7ea1e75d60… 54426 2013-07-21 13:47:20 200 69000.66264736 FTC
6f9ca0366c… 54428 2013-07-21 13:47:21 200 69200.66264736 FTC
40366f6003… 54431 2013-07-21 13:47:22 200 69400.66264736 FTC
2a2f7ae9df… 54430 2013-07-21 13:47:23 200 69600.66264736 FTC
0169b5ac0b… 54427 2013-07-21 13:47:25 200.000195 69800.66284236 FTC
9d46bf6d9b… 54432 2013-07-21 13:47:27 200.005 70000.66784236 FTC -
These block rates are not impossible. It is allowed to find blocks shorter than the allocated time window if the blockchain is shorter than it is expected to be at this point in time.
It’s my opinion that somebody has realized that many blockchains are underfilled, and are using their massive hashpower to get these blocks quickly until the chain reaches it’s maximum possible height.
I’m still finding blocks on fcpool, but not as often as expected - this is due to the large hashrate currently on the network. I’d expect difficulty to rise soon.
BigVern
-
*******
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
With the diff jumping again and our hash rate about to drop we better be ready for another attack. Also if you have not seen the post about the hash rate on the stats page its been doing some weird stuff.
-
Find the latest trend in Extra Mined Coin Days, in terms of days mined before the announce date. For the last 5 days.
I have split the chart up to show the detail
1.All coins being analysed
2.Just coins in excesses of specification, no IxCoin.
3.Just coins moving closer to excessive coins to specification.
4.Just coins which have not produced the correct level of coins.There could be some modifications to the figures once someone checks the spreadsheet, but the trend is correct. I am sampling at about 10 to 11 GMT, so there will be a slight variability in 24 hr sample.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
Charts of the Blocks per Day against the specified Number there should be mined. 18th to 23rd July.2013 Feathercoin.
There were so many additional Blocks mined to specification on the 19th, the second graph is scaled to see the current detail.
Happy to these figures double checked.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
BigVern got me some better data from his logs of the coins mined per day. See attached charts,
1. Feather Coin Blocks per day mined against theoretical block specification 20May to 20July 2013
2. Blocks per week mined against theoretical block specification 20May to 20July 2013I’d like to see the difficulty added to that chart, so we can see how it varies. + average daily hash rate, would be even better.
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
I added a couple of days Block Production and the Difference at the end of each day, to BigVerns Data. See new chart.
Feathercoin Block Production p Day - 23rdMay to 23 July 2013
[attachment deleted by admin]
-
************************
becoming paranoid now…
-
What? 15 to 30 Ghash? stats says 5 ghash or 7.9 to 10 from 1.5
-
their is someone with 51% . he play a bit with the time of the blocks so stats page is just crazzy. but it seems he is playing in the 5-45 minutes difference in the past. not sure if it’s a try to manipulate without fork the time of the chain or he just want to be spotted and spread fear.
but [url=http://explorer.feathercoin.com/a/72yA8EccyG]http://explorer.feathercoin.com/a/72yA8EccyG[/url] has found 297 block from 56962 and 57475. so 297/513= 58%
But from 6900 to 57470 he don’t have really fork the chain (3 times 1 blocks fork occur but this can be normal. have a low probability to happen but possible and 1 one block fork isolated should have no consequence)
so “he” is around but not done “bad things”, he just play around, let see what happen next as he usually can be spotted before attacks occur, so this is not an unusual pattern.
sorry I don’t have the time and patience to do all the block chain check every day for fork. I usually do when someone report a fact of weird stuff or that I spot something weird while looking at the block list. a fork indicator on the side of a block indicating an orphan(with the lenght of it would be the ultimate). so fork can be spotted. blockchain.info have a nice explorer just for orphan [url=http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks]http://blockchain.info/orphaned-blocks[/url]
note: orphan are not propagate so you need to be online on the broadcast to get them in your database
EDIT: ATTACK STARTED around 57465 until now 57514 he keep the chain means time to July 28 at 2:14. (the chain means time is the lowest time that can be used to put a block in the chain) it’ s along run but if he keeps that until retarget and put it in retarget block he can put us in pretty high 114+41% diff. And then low hash rate and all related issues will follow
EDIT2: attack stop at 57547 so no damage done, need to check if some block are orphan. but first fast scan seems to have no indication of that. -
Hi All,
been trying to do a bit of analysis of where network connections are coming from, obviously I realise I will chain through the first connection, however.
Over the last day there seems to be a very high proportion of I.P.s from Brisbane Australia. Obviously if there was an attacker, it could be many miners joining together, or through some proxy, so could be from anywhere. However, the attacker would have to join to the network to propagate the attack.
Is there any figures on the number of I.P’s attaching to the network? Is there anyway of detecting if the IP is never ingoing? How come some people are using old clients with the Litecoin upgrade message?
In the getpeerinfo there are fields banscore and starting height, how are these used in the code and could they be a mechanism for us to community ban known Fraudulent IPs, at least temporarily?
“releasetime” : 0,
“startingheight” : 57568,
“banscore” : 0 -
[quote] EDIT: ATTACK STARTED around 57465 until now 57514 he keep the chain means time to July 28 at 2:14. (the chain means time is the lowest time that can be used to put a block in the chain) it’ s along run but if he keeps that until retarget and put it in retarget block he can put us in pretty high 114+41% diff. And then low hash rate and all related issues will follow
[/quote]Just doing some analysis, I already uploaded to “suspect addresses”, it might be relevant, that manipulating the difficulty is an aim. A group of solo miners could deliberately effect the difficulty, by mining and stopping, then re-entering with a “proportionate” hash rate when the difficulty goes down, they get a greater proportion of blocks than if they had mined consistently.
Looking at the lack of correlation between difficulty and block rate would indicate to me, there is another factor controling the block rate and difficulty.
In some ways I wish it was me just being paranoid!
[attachment deleted by admin]
