Spyke
monero.town

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.

8
WRSreply
monero.town

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

4
4rkalreply
monero.town

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

1

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

1

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.

1

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.

5

You reached the end

51% Attack | Spyke