5/ "Attacker double-spent 807,260 ETC ($5.6 million) during this attack and spent 17.5 BTC ($192K) to acquire the hash power for the attack. The attacker also got 13K ETC as a block mining reward, which we not including in our double-spent calculation."
It's so cheap to attack $ETC that the 51% attack last weekend mostly paid for itself with block rewards
(Attacker also doublespent almost $6m USD worth, so the attack was very profitable)
#33kByJuly3018Moku //not_giving_away_ETH\\ - @CarpeNoctom3 months ago
RT @Bitquery_io: How attacker stole 807,260 ETC ($5.6 million) during the 31st July Ethereum Classic ($ETC) 51% attack
Read our Full investigation 👇
#ETC #Ethreumclassic #crypto #bitcoin $BTC $ETH #ethereum
And recent news make me think they will even get away with it. :-/
arahayaSilver | QC: CC 70, BTC 29 | NEO 1023 months ago
ok here is my theory. the reason ETC price doesn't dump is because the attacker is buying ETC to do the next 51% attack. then the attacker will dump his coins to another attacker who is trying to do the same thing. so money is flowing from dumb attackers to smart attackers.
I got no ill will toward ETC but how did something like this NOT just crash the value completely? I would assume that once a network has been compromised like that then users will lose faith and jump ship. I appear to be wrong though as that really hasn't happened.
There's a sharp drop but it seems to have largely returned to where it was before the attack, only a week later.
I'm just not sure how to interpret the market on this one.
Here's a hint: it's because "the market" doesn't care about the "technology".
Crypto is a tool for the wealthy to extract value from the less-wealthy, and to launder money. The market didn't react because a 51% attack doesn't impact either of those things.
This is fascinating, ill need to read up on 51% attacks to comprehend it better as im trying educate my self on mining but this seems like a terrible oversight. Thanks for the helpful links to those that posted further explanations.
There's a very deep community of reasonable people and they're developed by IOHK. They just believe in immutability over all else. That's how Ethereum started to exist anyway, they're the original chain
I like your optimism but ... no.
Anyone around at the time had both forks; if yourself them then it was your own decision; if you bought ETC later .... you should have done better research (or hedged your bet and bought both).
ETC should have never existed in the first place.
True ETC people will never forget. It's like all over their website, about how "true to fundamentals," "always maintained 100% immutability," "untarnished chain" and things like that. They're a small community anyway, that's why they got 51%'ed lol. They won't change so let them be
1 individual exploiting the code is not "reversing transactions" even if technically that's what's happening. Just because the network isn't currently robust enough to stop a 51% attack doesn't mean those transactions are being reversed. They were never consensus to begin with.