Hash War: Mystery Miner’s Block Block Attack Makes ABC’s New Blockchain almost inevitable

According to various reports, pro-IFP chain Bitcoin ABC has been under ‘attack’ for several days in a row now. The mysterious miner has been digging a large number of sequential blocks, but almost all of them have been empty. The miner who calls himself ‘Voluntarism.dev’ says the mine is a group of “old-guard miners,” and claims they can mess with the minority ABC chain for years.

** This article has been updated at 6:15 pm (EST) on November 28, to reflect recent comments by the founder of Blockchair, Nikita Zhavoronkov, who has noted that there have been at least six blockchain rebates on the ABC’s anonymous chain so far, since the goal fork on November 15, 2020.

‘The Price of Freedom is Steep’

The cryptocurrency community has been watching the outcome of the recent blockchain bifurcation, which saw ABC’s Bitcoin token fork into its own blockchain. ABC’s Bitcoin network remains anonymous and without branding, and the token is often referred to as “ABC,” “BCHA,” or “BAB.”

Last week, news.Bitcoin.com reported on a stealth miner who has been excavating a large number of empty blocks in a row. Because blocks have been empty for so long, it has been difficult for anyone to send a transaction on the ABC chain and confirm the transaction in a timely manner.

Hash War: Mystery Miner's Block Block Attack Makes ABC's New Blockchain almost inevitable
The operator of the secret mine mine Voluntarism.dev was assumed to control 90% of ABC’s chain hashrate on Saturday, November 28, 2020.

Since our news desk report, the mystery miner has introduced the group on Twitter under the account name Volunteering.dev, and through coinbase parameter messages each time the pool finds an ABC block reward. On November 24, 2020, Voluntarism.dev’s Twitter account created a message with a blockchain signature to verify its legitimacy.

The same day the miner tweeted: “good ideas don’t need power” and the next day the group tweeted a message to other miners pointing hashrate to the ABC chain. Voluntarism.dev said:

I hope all miners agree: we would like 100% of the BCHA coin prize to go to pqnqv9lt7e5vjyp0w88zf2af0l92l8rxdgnlxww9j9.

Mystery miner Voluntarism.dev has also approached Github to show that the group is serious about the 100% sent to the IFP address.

Later that day, the pool tweeted that the “price of freedom is steep” and also tweeted some screenshots of leading developer Bitcoin ABC Amaury Séchet discuss the infrastructure funding plan (IFP).

“ABC broke the NAP (non-aggression principle) with 9 months of civil war,” Voluntarism.dev’s Twitter account emphasized in another tweet. “Freeriders have to pay ABC 100% of the block prize. We will deprive every block that does not. We will also pay 100%, once ABC merges this change, ”added the pool.

In another statement Voluntarism.dev said:

How much value did ABC steal [Bitcoin Cash] pales compared to our spending. We are a group of miners and old guard whales. We can do this for years. Next time you fork: use your own genesis block, your own PoW [algorithm], and build your own community. [Bitcoin Cash] is protected.

Meanwhile, Thursday to Saturday, it took more than 24 hours before any ABC pro-IFP transactions cleared, and the blockchain has suffered a total of two blockchain (reorg) reorganizations so far. This means that after a block has been mined by a miner other than Voluntarism.dev, it has been returned and the once confirmed blocks simply disappear. On Saturday morning, there was a third attempt to reshape the ABC chain, but it was returned by the Dutch Mining pool. The Dutch Mining mine has successfully processed thousands of transactions for senders on Saturday early afternoon (EST).

Spawning Camp Invasion or Forced Consensus Mechanism?

On November 28, 2020, Ethereum cofounder Vitalik Buterin tweeted about the mysterious mining pool that controls 90% of ABC’s chain hashpower today. ” [A] mine mine 51% appear to attack BCHA with the specific aim of destroying it. Will this be the first real spawning camp attack on the PoW chain? ”Buterin he asked his Twitter followers.

However, the recent empty block attacker is not the first true spawning camp attack on the PoW chain. A Bitcoin clone called Coiledcoin appeared in 2012 and has been reported to have been attacked by hashrate as well. The BTC community accused Core developer Luke Dash Jr. of leveraging the Eligius mining pool in order to takedown the Coiledcoin project. Software developer Peter Todd he spoke about the incident on Twitter in 2016 when a 51% attack on ethereum classic (ETC) was threatened.

Hash War: Mystery Miner's Block Block Attack Makes ABC's New Blockchain almost inevitable
A snapshot of the first two blockchain reorganizations (reorg).

On Friday, in reply to Buterin’s tweet about the mysterious miner, BCH proposer, and researcher, Javier González he explained that the mine pit technique was not an attack. “It’s not an attack, it’s defensive,” González He said. “Bitcoin ABC has cut the BCH project to capture 8% of coinbase miners’ motivation. 90% of the BCH [hashpower] he voted against it. And now they are defending their interests. Enforcement consensus mechanism, ”González insisted.

Hash War: Mystery Miner's Block Block Attack Makes ABC's New Blockchain almost inevitable
González and others believe the mysterious miner empties blocks to make it easier to continue the plan.

News.Bitcoin.com spoke with González on Saturday, while the third reorg blockchain attempt occurred. González is also the inventor of the Bitcoin Mining Parliament (BMP), the concept of being is facing Bitcoin Cash network issues using the Nakamoto Consensus.

During the morning hours (EST), the Viabtc and Mining Dutch mining mines blocked blocks 662396 and 662397. These two blocks confirmed thousands of transactions, but Voluntarism.dev once again reorganized the chain with its hashpower huge and the blocks disappeared. González sources data from blockchain analyst Blockchair and also runs its own pro-IFP ABC node. Although not too long after, a conflict hashpower prevented Voluntarism.dev’s third reorg attempt.

“The first blank block + reorg attack to destroy a minority split attempt (BAB / BCHA / ABC) is happening,” González told news.Bitcoin.com on Saturday. “I think they are a group of BCH miners and whales who act collectively to protect the [Bitcoin Cash] a blockchain of the partition caused by Bitcoin ABC (Amaury) to hold the 8% of the coinbase incentive belonging to the miners. González further added:

In essence, Amaury believes that it has the right to scrap the project and take the 8% (who knows how much in the future). But hashwar denies that.

Hash War: Mystery Miner's Block Block Attack Makes ABC's New Blockchain almost inevitable

The Mystery Miner’s Third Attempt to Reorg ABC Implemented with Opposing Hashpower

González also said the ABC chain has only two mitigations; either selectively ignore hashpower (outright hub) or change the algorithm in an emergency. The researcher further highlighted that the ABC chain has no use and that marketers may have to deliver the coin. While the mysterious miner empties blocks, he also maximizes the attack by making it González’s precise precision.

“What we’re seeing is what I call ‘active mining.’ That is, it is not ‘automatic mining’ following market incentive, but the miners are following their own brains, spending money, thinking of a bigger incentive in the future (in this case, it is appeared to be a BCH defense), “González emphasized.

In conversation with the researcher, two more blocks were excavated by the Dutch Mining mine. González said the mysterious miner Voluntarism.dev is now confronted in the hash war. “A great deal of hashrate has overturned the reorg, defending BAB,” González detailed. There are currently two successful reorganizations and one failed attempt on Saturday morning.

After the two blocks were discovered by Mining Dutch, Voluntarism.dev dug four blocks later, mine said the conflicting hashpower was a “bully” in the following coinbase message. Following the four blocks mined by Voluntarism.dev (662412, 662413, 662414, 662415), Dutch Mining acquired two more blocks and successfully processed transactions.

Blockchair engine has held a total of six blockchain reorgs since the initial fork. Here is a picture of the node log shared by the founder of Blockchair, Nikita Zhavoronkov on November 28, 2020.

** At 6:15 pm (EST) Block Chair founder, Nikita Zhavoronkov, He said his team has captured a total of six blockchain reorganizations on the ABC chain so far.

“So far our machine has held 6 reorgs on BCHA orphanage of 12 blocks in total. Two 1 block reorgs on November 25th, two 2 block rebates on 26th, a 2 block reorg on 28th, and a 4-block reorg on 28th, ” Zhavoronkov tweeted. Actually it was [many] more reorgs, they happen very fast and our machine loses that. I’d probably need some sort of separate log parser to get more accurate numbers, ”Zhavoronkov added.

Currently, BCH fans and ABC proponents will be watching the chain with their eyes peeled. To date, the chain appears to be far from functional and the existence of the network going forward is uncertain.

What do you think of the hash war and the mysterious miner? Let us know what you think of this topic in the comments section below.

Tags in this story

Chain ABC, ABC Coin, Amaury Séchet, BCH, Bitcoin ABC, bitcoin cash, Blockchair, Confirmations, active mining, Hash War, Hashpower, Javier González, Miners, Mining-dutch, Mystery Miner, Proof of Work, SHA256, slow confirmation , transactions, ViaBTC, Vitalik Buterin

Image Credits: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons, Charts by Javier González, Coin Dance Cash ABC ABC hashrate distribution,

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not a direct offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell, nor a recommendation or endorsement of any products, services or companies. Bitcoin.com does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned in this article.