A well-known Bitcoin developer and researcher known as b10c published technical conclusions this Friday that rule out the existence of “self-mining” attacks (selfish mining) after the recent reorganization of two blocks that occurred on the network this week.
According to the analysis, initially created uncertainty in the communitythis was due to the expected behavior of the protocol under conditions of latency and intensive computational power.
The study followed the March 23 event when a temporary divergence was recorded at block height 941,880. after that, AntPool and ViaBTC pool mined the same block. The fork continued for one more block and was resolved by Foundry USA mining a longer chain and mining 6 consecutive blocks.
To test his theory, b10c Developed functional tests that simulate current network conditions. The data collected suggests that this event was not a malicious act to manipulate rewards, but rather a technical coincidence where multiple factors were consistent with Bitcoin’s original design during an accidental chain split.
Differences from technical ties selfish mining
To understand the relevance of this finding, we need to define: selfish mining (Selfish Mining): This is a strategy where miners find a block but do not immediately communicate it to the rest of the network. Instead, keep it secret and continue mining on it to build a longer private chain. The goal is to suddenly publish it later. invalidate blocks found in that interval by other honest minersthus keeping a larger share of the reward.
At the March event, suspicions about this practice arose due to the number of blocks one actor received in a row. b10c analysis points to natural reorganization. In Bitcoin, a reorganization occurs when a node receives a chain of mined blocks that has accumulated more work than the blocks it was tracking. What made this event unusual is that it is two blocks deep, as most “relationships” between miners are usually resolved with the appearance of a single additional block.
The study explains that the propagation of blocks within a global network can involve delays on the order of milliseconds. If two pools find a block at about the same time, the network will split geographically until one takes the lead. in this case, Foundry USA’s vast processing power This allowed its chain to quickly outperform AntPool and ViaBTC’s chains, with disputes being resolved in an automated manner by the software’s own rules.
Consensus security and robustness
While this analysis may seem alarming when you see a single pool mining 6 blocks in a row, it is a statistical probability within a probability system. Automatic resolution of conflicts indicates that economic incentives and consensus rules worked to protect the integrity of accounting records without the need for external intervention.
These types of events reinforce the technical recommendation to wait for multiple confirmations for high-value transactions. After confirming that it is a propagation phenomenon and not an exploit, Confidence in the robustness of the protocol remains intactThis shows that networks can absorb and correct these contradictions in an organic and predictable manner.
(Tag translation) Bitcoin (BTC)
