Double Expenditure Problem and Ethereum Work Test
As each of them knows, one of the basic problems in maintaining Blockchain integrity is an attack of double expense. Regarding cryptocurrencies such as Ethereum, which is based on the algorithm of the consent of the test (Pow), understanding this problem is decisive for catching the internal mechanisms of these digital systems.
Double Expenditure Problem: Bitcoin perspective
In the original article Satoshi Nakamoto “Bitcoin: and Pet-to-to-Peer Electrony Cash System”, which was published in 2008, was a problem attack actually a problem. To put it simply, if the attacker could control more than half of all the network extraction power outputs, it would be possible to send the transactions by adding a new block with a conflict transaction.
This is because most blockchain networks are based on a working test system that involves the resolution of complex mathematical puzzles to verify transactions and create new blocks. In Bitcoine, for example, miners compete in the plant to solve these puzzles using powerful computers to perform calculations. The first miner to solve the puzzle can add a new block of blockchain transactions.
Labor Test Ethereum: Another approach
Now let’s move on to Ethereum, an open -source blockchain platform that allows developers to create and distribute intelligent contracts. While the algorithm of the consent of the Ethereum Trial Consents is similar to the Bitcoin algorithm, there are certain key differences.
In Ethereum, the process of mining differs from bitcoins. Instead of using complex mathematical puzzles (known as “hash rainfall”), Ethereum uses a more decentralized approach called “Equigible on gas”. This means that miners compete in a race to solve complex mathematical problems related to gas consumption within the block (also known as the “transaction”).
Why must the opponent check 50% of the computing force?
So why does it require at least half of all the processing performance in the network for double expenditure on Ethereum? The answer lies in the number of nodes in the network and in the total amount of the required computing sources.
Here are several key factors that contribute to this requirement:
- The reason is that each miner has a significant amount of computing sources, including powerful graphics cards and high -end CPU.
- Transaction volume
: The more transactions occur in the network, the greater the demand for mining sources. As the number of transactions increases, the total amount of computing force required to verify them also increases.
3 To satisfy this restriction, miners must have sufficient computer resources to perform complex mathematical calculations.
Consequences for double shopping attacks
Although the opponent’s control, 50% of the computing power supply in the network does not guarantee success in attacking double costs, significantly increases the likelihood that these experiments are detected and rejected by nodes in the network. The reason is that most of the Ethereum nodes were optimized to detect and prevent suspicious behavior, which makes it difficult for the attackers to carry out successful double expenses.
Conclusion
In short, an opponent who needs to control at least half of all the calculation performance on a blockchain, such as Ethereum, makes it impossible for a double burnt -out transaction without being detected.
