Jump to content
coinologist

What can an attacker who controls majority or all of the full nodes do?

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, coinologist said:

Could you sensor transactions, double spends, create soft/hard-forks etc?

 

First tell us how the hell anyone would get control of the majority of nodes on the UNL, run by different organisations in different territories?

This is not Bitcoin. You can't just fire up a nuclear reactor in Jihanistan and out-mine everyone else into a minority. The XRPL works totally differently. That you can ask such a question implies that you have not read much.

Edited by PunishmentOfLuxury

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PunishmentOfLuxury said:

First tell us how the hell anyone would get control of the majority of nodes on the UNL, run by different organisations in different territories?

This is not Bitcoin. You can't just fire up a nuclear reactor in Jihanistan and out-mine everyone else into a minority. The XRPL works totally differently. That you can ask such a question implies that you have not read much.

I'm still learning about crypto, sorry if this upset anyone I was just asking a general question trying to get a grasp on the technology as a whole. There's lots of different information around and it's very overwhelming. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@coinologist

First thing to do would be to be precise about the terms used; node or validator. I believe you mean validator here. 

https://xrpcommunity.blog/rippled/

One thing to keep in mind, validator nodes´ operations are based on trust between validators. If other validators do not trust your validator, it is not part of the validication process. It does not matter if you have 100 validators running, when people realise there is one entity "trying to capture the process", they just choose not to trust those validators. All 100 are out.

Currently there are 155 validators of which 26 are listed as UNL (recommended by Ripple and 26.92% of them are run by Ripple). On top of that there are 991 nodes.

https://xrpledger.info/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, P3T3RIS said:

@coinologist

First thing to do would be to be precise about the terms used; node or validator. I believe you mean validator here. 

https://xrpcommunity.blog/rippled/

One thing to keep in mind, validator nodes´ operations are based on trust between validators. If other validators do not trust your validator, it is not part of the validication process. It does not matter if you have 100 validators running, when people realise there is one entity "trying to capture the process", they just choose not to trust those validators. All 100 are out.

Currently there are 155 validators of which 26 are listed as UNL (recommended by Ripple and 26.92% of them are run by Ripple). On top of that there are 991 nodes.

https://xrpledger.info/

Okay thank you, that's cleared things up for me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Phintech said:

LOL !   You certainly don’t sound like you’re “new to crypto”.  

 

I've been in the community for a month, I know the basics but not the ins and outs. A friend proposed the question so I was wondering if someone could help me out. Again, sorry if this upset anyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look into the difference between proof of work and proof of stake coins to see how they are validated as true transaction.

I am sorry for the response from the community your question seems valid to me, but it does closely resemble many arguments made by individuals who come to this forum and others just to knowing lie and stir stuff up. The longer you are in the space the more you will notice the trolling.

You can read up on papers written by David Schwartz or if you are technically literate you could ask in the technology section. If you are here for research good luck. If you are looking to see who to invest in, I would ask myself the qeustion, "which project has a clear use case, a clear direction, and has the ability to positively affect the lives of people locally to you as well as around the world,"  as well as "is the product creating a new economy that previously would not have existed." Again good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@coinologist I don't think its your question that set anyone off, its that there are regular influxes of new accounts here that come here specifically to try and stir up negativity (possibly to do things like find source material to fuel a negative article on an anti-XRP blog).  As such, some here may understandably be on a hair-trigger alert for it.

In my experience generally the forum will welcome questions, even difficult ones - assuming the result is a critical discussion that's productive. Also, you're likely better asking these types of questions in the Technical Discussion sub-forum - even if simple initially, such a query will likely become more technical as its answered in detail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, peanut56 said:

Look into the difference between proof of work and proof of stake coins to see how they are validated as true transaction.

I am sorry for the response from the community your question seems valid to me, but it does closely resemble many arguments made by individuals who come to this forum and others just to knowing lie and stir stuff up. The longer you are in the space the more you will notice the trolling.

You can read up on papers written by David Schwartz or if you are technically literate you could ask in the technology section. If you are here for research good luck. If you are looking to see who to invest in, I would ask myself the qeustion, "which project has a clear use case, a clear direction, and has the ability to positively affect the lives of people locally to you as well as around the world,"  as well as "is the product creating a new economy that previously would not have existed." Again good luck.

Thank you I will definitely have a look into there, I'm realizing things do get technical very quickly which is taking a bit to get used to. Thank you very much for your help :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to topic: IF a misterious entity can control 80%+ of all validators in the UNL, then they can basically do whatever they want with the network. They can completely change codebase and validate any transaction. So they can double spend, create new XRP, ban someone from the network, change the rules of XRPL.

But the remaining validators (the "good" ones) can choose to basically fork at a specific ledger and start a new ledger from there (not an easy task :) ).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, tulo said:

Back to topic: IF a misterious entity can control 80%+ of all validators in the UNL, then they can basically do whatever they want with the network. They can completely change codebase and validate any transaction. So they can double spend, create new XRP, ban someone from the network, change the rules of XRPL.

But the remaining validators (the "good" ones) can choose to basically fork at a specific ledger and start a new ledger from there (not an easy task :) ).

My guess: The network between the validators will keep on running, but the other nodes (the rest of the network) that didn't 'upgrade' will not follow, as the new transactions don't fit their ruleset. I think the validators will fork away from the rest of the network and the rest of the network will stop. Until new validators have been appointed in the rest of the network that do fit the same ruleset.

But I'm really interested in some more opinions on this..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, jn_r said:

My guess: The network between the validators will keep on running, but the other nodes (the rest of the network) that didn't 'upgrade' will not follow, as the new transactions don't fit their ruleset. I think the validators will fork away from the rest of the network and the rest of the network will stop. Until new validators have been appointed in the rest of the network that do fit the same ruleset.

But I'm really interested in some more opinions on this..

Yeah I agree totally. The rest of validators won't make progress in ledgers, while the 80% of validators will proceed with their rules. I don't know if we can talk about a fork, because the 80% are actually the majority, so that network IS the main network :) . 

Edited by tulo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, tulo said:

Yeah I agree totally. The rest of validators won't make progress in ledgers, while the 80% of validators will proceed with their rules. I don't know if we can talk about a fork, because the 80% are actually the majority, so that IS the main network :) . 

I like it. Never thought about it this way, but it is something that really speaks in favour of the ripple consensus solution :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...