Connect with us

Opinion

The Security Hustle: Protecting My Bitcoin From Hackers

Published

on


Bitcoin, the world’s first and leading cryptocurrency, has proven its mettle in its roughly fifteen years of existence. From 2011 to 2021, it was the world’s best-performing asset class in eight of the last eleven years. At the end of 2023, it reemerged as the world’s top-performing asset class.

It is also a trillion-dollar asset. BTC’s market capitalization is at $1.13 trillion as of this writing. This value is outside the overall crypto market cap and excludes all other crypto coins. From a fledgling currency in 2008, its value has risen from nearly zero to over $73,000, reaching a historical all-time high in 2024.

Bitcoin has minted many new millionaires and several billionaires. Famous founders of multi-billion dollar corporations involved in crypto include Brian Armstrong of Coinbase, Changpeng Zhao (CZ) of Binance, and Michael Saylor of MicroStrategy.

With such a meteoric rise, it’s hardly surprising that hackers keep trying to find ways to steal Bitcoin. As a Bitcoin owner, protecting your assets from cyber threats is critical. Here, we explore how BTC holders can protect their coins across platforms and activities.

The Current BTC Security Landscape

Hacks and losses in the crypto sphere are nothing new. In the second quarter of 2024 alone, the crypto ecosystem lost about $572.7 million due to fraudulent attacks and hacks. The figure is up 112 percent compared to the same period last year.

The year’s most significant BTC hack so far is that of DMM Bitcoin, a Japanese crypto trading platform. On May 31, 2024, DMM Bitcoin lost around $305 million worth of BTC.

Moreover, the year-to-date (YTD) losses from crypto fraud and hacks have reached $920.9 million—up 24 percent from $720 million the previous year. May and June have seen exceptionally high losses, making up $358.5 million of total crypto incidents. Centralized finance (CeFi) platforms accounted for 70 percent of all losses.

Hacking vs. fraud analysis: Hacks cause 98.5 percent of losses

According to a report by Immunefi, a leading bug bounty platform, hacks are responsible for most crypto losses. As of the second quarter of 2024, hacks remain the predominant cause of losses versus fraud. Fraud accounts for only 1.5 percent of the overall crypto losses in Q2 2024. Hacks, on the other hand, account for 98.5 percent.

Hacks

In Q2 2024, the crypto ecosystem lost $564,238,811 to hacks spread across 53 incidents. This figure represents a 155 percent increase versus Q2 2023 when losses caused by hacks amounted to less than half: $220,522,129.

Fraud

Fraud-related loss in Q2 2024 was $8,450,050, spread across 19 specific incidents. These numbers represent a decrease of 81 percent compared to the same period last year.

Bitcoin hackings you should know about

Despite advancements in blockchain technology and security measures, Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies remain vulnerable to hacking and security breaches.

To understand how Bitcoin hacks happen, you should understand their progression and history. Here, we examine some of the most significant Bitcoin hacks and analyze what went wrong.

The KuCoin hack

In September 2020, Singapore-based KuCoin, a major cryptocurrency exchange, suffered a security breach. The intrusion resulted in the theft of over $280 million worth of cryptocurrencies, including 1008 Bitcoin. The hackers gained access to the exchange’s hot wallets by exploiting weaknesses in its security protocols. According to KuCoin’s CEO, its cold wallets were unaffected.

In retrospect, enhanced security audits to identify vulnerabilities could have prevented the hack. It could also have been mitigated by using multi-signature or multisig wallets for the exchange’s hot storage and storing the more significant portion of assets in cold storage to minimize the accessible amount.

This Kucoin hack is not the first of it’s kind and certainly not the last. Just in June 2024 Kraken’s chief security officer disclosed “extremely critical” zero-day flaw in Kraken’s platform to steal $3M dollars. Here is how it was described:

The ‘security researcher’ disclosed this bug to two other individuals who they work with who fraudulently generated much larger sums. They ultimately withdrew nearly $3 million from their Kraken accounts… They demanded a call with their business development team (i.e. their sales reps) and have not agreed to return any funds until we provide a speculated $ amount that this bug could have caused if they had not disclosed it. This is not white-hat hacking; it is extortion!

Photo by Clint Patterson on Unsplash

The Coinbase hacks of 2019 and 2021

Coinbase is one of the most trusted platforms in the Bitcoin and crypto ecosystem. It is particularly dominant in the USA. As of this writing, Coinbase handles billions of dollars in transactions and has a market cap of $55.24 billion.

The first significant breach that shook Coinbase and the crypto community occurred in 2019. The hack showed the ingenuity of the attackers. It was also a wake-up call for the whole cryptosphere, as it was more sophisticated than anyone expected.

The attackers accessed Coinbase’s internal systems using a sophisticated phishing campaign. They targeted employees with spear-phishing emails carefully crafted to appear legitimate communications from a trusted source.

Over a dozen Coinbase employees initially received an email from Gregory Harris, supposedly a Research Grants Administrator at the University of Cambridge in the UK. The first email was dated May 30, 2019.

According to Coinbase, the email came from the legitimate Cambridge domain. It had no apparent malicious elements, passed spam detection, and appeared from a knowledgeable source, referencing the recipients’ backgrounds. Over the two weeks, the address continued sending emails, and nothing seemed amiss.

The attacker sent a follow-up email on June 17. This time, the new email contained a malicious URL. If opened via a Firefox browser, it would install malware that could take over the target user’s computer. According to Coinbase’s security team, the emails were part of a “sophisticated, highly targeted, thought out” attack.

Upon entering the network, the hackers moved laterally to escalate their access privileges. They exploited a Firefox zero-day vulnerability—an issue that had not yet been patched. Moreover, the attacks used not one but two Firefox zero-days, according to Philip Martin, the company’s chief information security officer, in 2019. Coinbase reported the attacks to Mozilla.

The vulnerability enabled the hackers to gain administrative access to the exchange’s backend network and critical systems, including databases for storing user information and private keys. In other words, a successful attack would allow a hacker to steal funds from the exchange. The tactic has been used numerous times and led to gigantic losses in crypto exchanges.

This particular hack was unique because the attackers demonstrated remarkable patience and precision. They chose a more calculated, insidious, and covert approach over a swift and noisy attack.

However, the breach was eventually detected. During a routine security audit, Coinbase’s security team noticed unusual patterns of withdrawals. They launched an investigation and discovered the breach. They then acted swiftly to contain the damage. They secured the compromised systems, patched the exploited vulnerabilities, and enhanced their monitoring capabilities.

After the hack, Coinbase publicly disclosed its details and mechanics. They assured users and the broader crypto community that the company’s insurance policy covered most of the stolen funds and that no customer funds would be lost.

Nonetheless, the incident had far-reaching implications. It highlighted the vulnerabilities inherent in even the most secure platforms and underscored the need to continuously improve cybersecurity practices.

The Coinbase security team walked back the entire attack, contained it, and reported the zero-day to Firefox.

The second breach that affected Coinbase was in late 2021. It involved the theft of approximately $100 million worth of cryptocurrencies, including BTC. Coinbase detected a platform vulnerability that enabled hackers to exploit a flaw in the crypto transfer process. The vulnerability led to unauthorized transactions and financial losses for some users on the platform.

The Bitfinex hack of 2016

Though it happened further back in the past, the Bitfinex hack is worth mentioning due to its magnitude. Hackers stole 119,756 BTC, valued at around $72 million. Today, based on the BTC price as of this writing, the same amount of BTC would be roughly $6.5 billion.

This particular hack occurred due to vulnerabilities in the multi-signature security system that Bitfinex employed in collaboration with BitGo. It could have been avoided by using advanced authentication protocols, user behavior monitoring, and segregated wallet structures to limit exposure.

BTC Security: Who should care?

Bitcoin security affects large coin holders and average ones alike. Bitcoin is used for different purposes, not just as a plain vanilla investment tool you buy and hold. It can be a payment vehicle or trading instrument.

It can be used as collateral and an underlying asset for various derivatives and derivative-like products. Its value and use cases are expanding as it is now used as the underlying for large-scale ETFs. Thus, you want to ensure your wallet is safe to protect your spending or day-trading money.

According to Chainalysis, the number of unique Bitcoin addresses has ballooned to 460 million. While it is impossible to determine how many people own Bitcoin accurately, we can estimate its popularity based on the number of generated addresses over the years.

We can also gauge active users through the number of wallets with active balances. According to BitInfoCharts, a blockchain analysis firm, over 67 million wallet addresses have a balance of $1 or more. Of these addresses, 40.5 million have a balance between $1 and $100, showing that most Bitcoin holders have a small amount of money invested.

Prominent American entrepreneur Tom Lee predicts that BTC could rally to $150,000 in the coming months. Lee claimed that the asset’s valuation has been negatively affected lately due to the issues related to the now-defunct crypto exchange Mt. Gox.

The Mt. Goz “overhang,” as he calls it, brought down the price due to the long overdue payouts from its bankruptcy proceedings, paying back thousands of users up to almost $9 billion in assets. He expects the overhang to disappear sometime in July.

Your small investment could yield appreciable returns if you buy and hold. Because of its long-term potential, security should matter to all BTC holders.

The security of an individual also affects the ecosystem. KYC hacks and leaks affect an individual’s privacy and identity, enabling malicious attackers to trace their activities. Such hacks can also be detrimental at the large investor or institutional level, leading to massive losses or draining the funds of individual investors signed up on a platform.

In addition, BTC and crypto losses negatively impact the markets. Therefore, security is a shared responsibility of BTC holders of all sizes.

The Importance of Using Secure Platforms

Given its high price and widespread appeal, BTC remains a target for hackers. If you are invested in Bitcoin, choosing a secure platform for buying and storing Bitcoin is crucial for protecting your investments.

Crypto custody solutions

Crypto custody solutions are businesses providing third-party crypto asset security and storage services. They mainly target accredited investors or institutions with significant Bitcoin or crypto holdings. Such clients include hedge funds, Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and exchanges.

These custody solutions generally combine hot and cold storage. Hot storage keeps you connected, but cold storage ensures your assets are safely offline.

Dealing with crypto custody solutions providers requires understanding various crypto security procedures, hot and cold wallets, multisig solutions, and other best practices to ensure your crypto is safe.

Which platform offers the best BTC storage and security?

The answer to this question depends on your needs as a Bitcoin investor or holder. If you wish to buy BTC, you have several reliable options.

According to investment strategist Lyn Alden, you can use Swan Bitcoin to buy BTC. Beyond a place to make one-time or recurring purchases for dollar-cost averaging (DCA), you should consider it as a Bitcoin accumulation platform. Swan provides Bitcoin IRA services for those investors who are serious about accumulating wealth long term.

Fees for all trades are 0.99 percent of each purchase. They do this without taking a spread on your purchase, too, and the first $10,000 worth of BTC has zero fees.

User-friendly security

Some notable security-related features include free auto-withdrawal to a self-custody address. Keeping your BTC with Swan’s custodian is also free, and you can access it through them with the BTC held in your name.

One simple yet ingenious way to use these features is to dollar cost average DCA into Bitcoin utilizing a plan that automatically buys BTC at regular intervals. The platform can also send it to your hardware wallet or another secure custody solution.

According to their website, all Swan data is encrypted with military-grade AES-256 encryption, and traffic on the site is encrypted with industry-standard TLSv1.2 encryption. Moreover, Swan does not have access to nor store private keys for BTC that are stored with its custodial partners.

Currently, Bakkt and Fortress Trust are the custodians of record. BitGo is its cold storage custodian.

Some would consider Swan Bitcoin a Coinbase alternative for buying and storing BTC in the US. While Coinbase is the dominant player in the exchange business, Swan simplifies BTC investment for retail and institutional investors.

Essential Security Tips To Safeguard Your BTC

The persistent attempts to hack BTC are a stark reminder of the ever-present risks lurking in the digital world. For users, it underscores the importance of personal security measures. Among these are enabling two-factor authentication and using hardware wallets for long-term storage of cryptocurrencies.

The following are some concepts and tips that will help you protect your BTC holdings:

Enabling two-factor authentication (2FA)

Two-factor authentication (2FA) provides a second or additional layer of account security by requiring a second form of ownership verification outside your password. It is best defined as a process that increases the likelihood that a person is who they say they are.

Rather than simply using a username and password, the 2FA process requests users to provide two authentication factors before accessing a crypto-related wallet, app, or platform.

Organizations must use 2FA to protect their data and users in the face of a high-risk cybersecurity landscape, specifically in BTC and crypto, wherein you can expect a higher volume of increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks.

One helpful way to frame 2FA is as a process that encourages people and organizations to stop solely relying on passwords to enter applications and websites.

With 2FA, cybercriminals have more difficulty stealing users’ identities or accessing their devices. The measure also helps organizations fend off attackers, even when a password has been stolen from one or several users.

Companies and individuals are using 2FA to prevent common cyber threats. These include phishing attacks that use users’ passwords and spoof targets’ identities after gaining credentials.

Setting up 2FA for Bitcoin

To set up 2FA for your BTC wallet, download a trustworthy authenticator like Authy, Google Authenticator, or other comparable apps.

Access your BTC account and look for the 2FA section. Click “Enable 2FA”. Link your account to the authenticator app by selecting “Scan QR Code” or “Add Account” on Google Authenticator. Afterward, scan the QR code shown on the BTC or crypto platform.

Some systems provide additional backup codes called recovery keys. These codes are vital for account retrieval. You must store these codes in a safe location. If you misplace or lose your device with the corresponding authenticator app, you can use the backup codes to recover your Bitcoin wallet or account access.

To complete your setup, you must enter the time-based one-time password (OTP) generated by the authenticator app when asked by your BTC or crypto platform.

Log out of your account and try to re-access it to test your 2FA setup. This time, the wallet, app, or platform should ask you for an OTP from your authenticator app.

Other 2FA techniques utilize SMS or email verification. While these are better than nothing, they are less safe and vulnerable to more attacks. SMS is susceptible to SIM-swapping attacks. Utilizing an authenticator app is deemed more secure.

Hardware-based 2FA is a more stringent security measure that involves physical devices like YubiKey for verification. However, authenticator apps will do very well for regular everyday use.

Ensure that your authenticator app is up to date and that your recovery keys are kept in a safe place, preferably offline.

Hot vs. cold wallets

As a BTC holder, you must understand the difference between hot and cold crypto wallets. Hot wallets are software that stores your BTC private keys on a device that’s online or connected to the Internet. They are convenient and easily accessible via online devices like mobile phones, tablets, or laptops.

Photo by Bastian Riccardi on Unsplash

Hot wallets often have more activity—they usually handle smaller, more frequent BTC transactions—and are convenient for trading. However, because they are online, they are vulnerable to hacks.

On the other hand, cold wallets aren’t connected to other devices or the Internet, making them less vulnerable to hacks and a more secure method of storing BTC private keys.

Cold wallets are usually hardware devices that resemble modified USB sticks or mini plastic cards with buttons and screens. They cost between $50 and about $300, although they could be more expensive. Popular brands include Ledger and Trezor.

Cold wallets like paper or metal wallets that record your private keys can be more straightforward. Their enhanced security is derived from their being offline. To trade funds from a cold wallet, you need to move them to a hot wallet that’s connected to a crypto exchange.

When you set up your hardware wallet, remember to write down your recovery seed phrase on paper and store it offline in a highly secure location. Please do not share this information with anyone or store it digitally.

Stay updated with the latest security measures

The Bitcoin and crypto space are continually evolving, and so are the hacking methods that threaten them. Thus, it is crucial to stay abreast of the latest security measures.

Keep all your software updated to protect against newly discovered vulnerabilities. Read reputable sources for updates and security news.

Protecting Your BTC Requires a Proactive Approach

In a dynamic tech and crypto sphere, the only way to stay ahead of hackers is to be proactive about your security. Ensure you have all the basics covered: choosing a secure platform, enabling two-factor authentication, and using cold storage or hardware wallets to protect your BTC wealth.

However, as hacks and exploits become more sophisticated, you can only fully secure your BTC when constantly updated on the latest security news. Also, ensure that your platforms and apps are continually on top of threats. If you are a buy-and-hold investor, ensure that your BTC funds are in cold storage.

Security in BTC can be effectively summarized by the old and oft-quoted adage from the early days of Bitcoin: “Not your keys, not your coins.” Make sure you have ultimate control over your private keys. And if you do choose a platform to hold them temporarily or entrust them with custody, understand the nuances of the agreement and infrastructure.

Bitcoin was meant to be decentralized, so the more autonomous you are about managing your keys, the better security you have.

This is a guest post by Ivan Serrano. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.



Source link

hardware wallets

Celebrating 10 Years of the Hardware Wallet Revolution

Published

on



As we celebrate the 10th anniversary of the first hardware wallet, it’s remarkable to see how far Bitcoin security has come. From the early days of precarious self-custody methods to the game-changing creation of the Trezor Model One, this revolution has transformed the way we protect our digital assets. With a decade of this experience behind us, it’s worth revisiting the challenges of early Bitcoin self-custody, the pivotal impact of the first hardware wallet, the essential role of self-custody in today’s Bitcoin landscape, and the innovative advancements continuing to shape the future of crypto security.

The Origin Story

It all began in 2011 when Marek “Slush” Palatinus logged onto his mining pool server and discovered 3,000 BTC were missing. A mining pool is a collective of miners who combine their computational resources to increase their chances of successfully mining Bitcoin blocks. Slushpool, now known as Braiins Pool, was the pioneering mining pool in the Bitcoin community, established in 2010.

This incident highlighted a significant issue: even tech-savvy Bitcoin enthusiasts could fall victim to online attacks. At that time, securing and managing Bitcoin was a daunting task, involving storing private keys on a computer. However, securing information on a computer is difficult; these complex machines are vulnerable to many threats that allow thieves to steal private keys controlling Bitcoin. The hack that cost Palatinus 3,000 BTC was a reminder of these early vulnerabilities.

Recognizing a pressing need for a simple, stand-alone device that could securely store Bitcoin, Slush, along with Pavol “Stick” Rusnák, embarked on creating the world’s first hardware wallet. Their vision was to develop an offline computer specifically designed to store Bitcoin securely and make it accessible to non-technical users. The concept was straightforward yet revolutionary: a small, single-purpose device that would keep private keys in an isolated environment, protected from online threats.

Before Hardware Wallets

Before hardware wallets became widely available, users had to rely on software wallets installed on computers or smartphones, which exposed them to a range of security threats. Malware infections and other attacks were common. Paper wallets were considered more secure but still required a computer to create the wallet. More secure methods, such as using air-gapped computers for cold storage, required significant technical expertise, and even these methods lacked an adequate level of security for larger amounts of Bitcoin.

The usability of early Bitcoin wallets was also a significant issue, with clunky interfaces and complicated backup processes. Many users failed to back up their wallets properly, leading to permanent loss of funds if a device was lost or damaged. Users were frequently unaware of best practices for backups, and the lack of standardized backup methods further increased the risk. A major improvement in backup standardization came with the introduction of Hierarchical Deterministic (HD) Wallets with BIP32 in 2012, allowing for easier and more reliable backups. Despite these advancements, there was still a lack of easy and user-friendly options for newcomers. In short, the period before Hardware Wallets was marked by significant security and usability challenges, making Bitcoin self-custody a complex and risky endeavor.

The First Hardware Wallet

In the years leading up to 2014, various attempts were made to develop simple, single-purpose devices for cryptocurrency storage. However, these efforts failed to gain traction or meet the necessary security standards. Recognizing the need for a robust solution, Slush and Stick monitored the landscape for two years before they finally decided to create their own hardware wallet.

In 2014, they released the Trezor Model One. This device was the first ever hardware wallet, combining user-friendly design, truly random private key generation, and the ability to easily sign transactions completely offline. In addition, it implemented the BIP39 standard, a new standard created by the Trezor creators to back up wallets using a list of 24 words representing the private keys, a standard adopted by many wallets and familiar to anyone who has put their Bitcoin in self-custody.

When the user first connects the device, it guides them through the setup process to create a new wallet. The device generates a recovery seed, which represents a human-readable version of the wallet’s master private key and enables wallet recovery in case of device malfunction. The user is prompted to write down this list of words on a piece of paper, ensuring the wallet is backed up, and the private keys remain offline.

This onboarding process ensures that users create a backup and keep it secure. The user-friendly design offers advanced security, making hardware wallets accessible to both beginners and experienced users.

The Open Source Advantage

A key aspect of Bitcoin is its commitment to open-source principles, and that’s why the founders of Trezor adhered to the same principles when developing the Trezor Model One. This approach has been adopted by most manufacturers in the industry. Open-source software allows the community to audit and verify a system’s integrity. This transparency ensures that potential vulnerabilities can be identified and addressed promptly and allows improvement by the global community. The first hardware wallet was open source, and many in the industry have embraced this approach for transparency, emphasizing the Bitcoin ethos, “Don’t trust; verify.”

The Importance of Self-Custody

Throughout Bitcoin’s life, we have seen many crypto exchanges and custodians collapse or suffer severe security breaches, showing the importance of holding your private keys. The mantra “not your keys, not your coins” emphasizes that relying on third-party institutions means trusting someone else with your assets, which can lead to big problems if the exchange gets hacked, mismanaged, or faces legal issues.

The Mt. Gox incident in 2014, one of the earliest and most notable exchange collapses, saw the loss of 850,000 Bitcoins, valued at hundreds of millions of dollars at the time. This catastrophic failure was due to both hacking and mismanagement, leaving users unable to recover their funds. Bitfinex also suffered a significant hack in 2016, resulting in the theft of nearly 120,000 Bitcoins. QuadrigaCX in 2019 saw users losing access to their funds after the sudden death of its founder, who was the only one with the keys to the exchange’s wallets. Cryptopia faced a debilitating hack in 2019, and Binance, the largest cryptocurrency exchange by volume, has also experienced breaches and faces increasing regulatory scrutiny. More recently, the FTX collapse in 2022 further reinforced the dangers of entrusting assets to centralized entities. Overall, mismanagement and fraudulent activities led to the loss of billions, impacting countless users and shaking confidence in centralized exchanges.

By using hardware wallets, individuals can achieve true financial independence, keeping their digital assets safe from the vulnerabilities of trusted custodians.

The Evolving Landscape of Hardware Wallets

Over the past decade, the hardware wallet industry has greatly expanded, with many companies offering a variety of products and features to meet different needs. User interfaces now range from simple button-based navigation to touchscreens and full keyboards. Many devices now support multiple cryptocurrencies, while some focus exclusively on Bitcoin. This range of devices caters to both beginners and advanced users, ensuring everyone can find a suitable option.

Another advancement has been the inclusion of secure elements—specialized chips designed to protect devices from physical attacks. However, all secure elements currently available on the market are closed-source, which raises transparency concerns. To address this issue, companies like Tropic Square are actively working on developing open-source secure elements to enhance trust and security.

Other significant advancements in the industry aim to enhance the security and robustness of wallet backups. Techniques such as Shamir’s Secret Sharing, Multisignature Wallets, and SeedXOR allow users to remove single points of failure, making it significantly more difficult for thieves to compromise the wallet.

Looking ahead, we can expect more improvements in hardware wallet security and usability. One notable development is the wider implementation of a new enhanced standard, SLIP39, which uses Shamir’s Secret Sharing. This method is becoming preferred over the traditional BIP39 standard due to its enhanced security and user-friendliness. With SLIP39, users start with a single list of words to back up their wallet and can later upgrade to a “sharded” backup with multiple shares. This approach provides a flexible and highly secure solution, making advanced security measures more accessible and practical for a wider range of users.

Looking Forward to the Next Decade

As we celebrate the first Hardware Wallet, it’s clear that this revolution has fundamentally transformed cryptocurrency security. From humble beginnings as a hobby project to becoming a trusted name in the industry, Trezor has pioneered innovations that have empowered countless individuals to take control of their financial future. The journey from the first prototypes to the sophisticated devices that we now use today is a testament to the vision and dedication of the Trezor team.

With the continuous evolution of Hardware Wallet functionality and a commitment to security and transparency, the future looks promising. As we look forward to the next decade, the industry remains dedicated to securing and innovating Bitcoin security and usability, ensuring that self-custody becomes increasingly accessible and secure for all.

This is a guest post by Josef Tetek. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.



Source link

Continue Reading

Fractal Bitcoin

Fractal Bitcoin: A Misleading Affinity

Published

on



Fractal Bitcoin is a recently launched project that bills itself as “the only native scaling solution completely and instantly compatible with Bitcoin. In essence it is a merge mined system portraying itself as a second layer sidechain for Bitcoin, where multiple levels of “sidechains” can be stacked on top of each other. So think of a sidechain of the mainchain, a sidechain of the sidechain, a sidechain of the sidechain of the sidechain, etc. It is not.

Shitcoins Are Not Second Layers

Firstly, the entire system is built around a new native token, Fractal Bitcoin, that is issued completely independent of Bitcoin. It even comes with a massive pre-mine of 50% of the supply being split between an “ecosystem treasury”, a pre-sale, advisors, grants for the community, and developers. This is essentially the equivalent of the entire first halving period of Bitcoin when the block subsidy was 50 BTC per block. From here the network jumps to 25 Fractal Bitcoin (FB) per block.

Secondly, there is no peg mechanism for moving actual bitcoin into the “sidechain.” Yes, you read that correctly. They are framing themselves as a sidechain/layer two, but there is no actual mechanism to move your bitcoin back and forth between the mainchain and “the sidechain” Fractal Bitcoin. It is a completely independent system with no actual ability to move funds back and forth. One of the core aspects of a sidechain is the ability to peg, or “lock,” your bitcoin from the mainchain and move it into a sidechain system so that you can make use of it there, eventually moving those funds back to the mainchain.

Fractal Bitcoin has no such mechanism, and not only that, the discussion around the topic in their “technical litepaper” is completely incoherent. They discuss Discreet Log Contracts (DLCs) as a mechanism for “bridging” between different levels of Fractal sidechains. DLCs are not a suitable mechanism for a peg at all. DLCs function by pre-defining where coins will be sent based on a signature from an oracle or a set of oracles expected at a given time. They are used for gambling, financial products such as derivatives, etc. between two parties. DLCs are not designed to allow funds to be sent to any arbitrary place based on the outcome of the contract, they are designed to allocate funds to one of two participants, or proportionally to each participant, based on the outcome of some contract or event that an oracle signs off on.

This is not suitable for a sidechain or other system peg, which is ideally architected to allow any current owner of coins in the sidechain or second layer system to freely send coins to any destination they choose so long as they have valid control over them on the other system. So not only is there no functional peg mechanism for the live system, but their hand waving about potential designs for one in their litepaper is just completely incoherent.

The whole “design” is a clown show designed to pump bags for pre-mine holders.

“Cadence” Mining

Another troubling aspect of the system is its variation on merge mining, Cadence mining. The network utilizes SHA256 as the hashing algorithm, and it does support conventional Namecoin style merge mining. But there is a catch. Only one third of the blocks produced on the network are capable of being produced by Bitcoin miners engaged in merge mining. The other two thirds must be mined conventionally by miners switching their hashrate entirely over to Fractal Bitcoin.

This is a poisonous incentive structure. It essentially tries to associate itself with the Bitcoin network calling itself a “merge mined system”, when in reality two thirds of the block production mandates turning hashrate away from securing the Bitcoin network and devoting it exclusively to securing Fractal Bitcoin. Most of the retard is not capturable by miners who continue mining Bitcoin, and the greater the value of FB the greater the incentive for Bitcoin miners to defect and begin mining it instead of bitcoin to increase the share of the FB reward they capture.

It essentially functions as an incentive distortion for Bitcoin miners proportional to the value of the overall system. It also offers no advantage in terms of security at all. By forcing this choice it guarantees that most of the network difficulty must remain low enough that whatever small portion of miners find it profitable to defect from Bitcoin to FB can mine blocks at the targeted 30 second block interval. Conventional merge mining would allow the entire mining network to contribute security without having to deal with the opportunity cost of not mining Bitcoin.

What’s The Point of This?

The ostensible point of the network is to facilitate things like DeFi and Ordinals, that consume large amounts of blockspace, by giving them a system to utilize other than the mainchain. The problem with this logic is the reason those systems are built on the mainchain in the first place is because people value the immutability and security that it provides. Nothing about the architecture of Fractal Bitcoin provides the same security guarantees.

Even if they did, there is no functional pegging mechanism at all to facilitate these assets from being interoperable between the mainchain and the Fractal Bitcoin chain. The entire system is a series of handwaves past important technical details to rush something to market that allows insiders to profit off of the pre-mine involved in the launch.

No peg mechanism, an incoherent “merge mining” scheme that not only creates a poisonous incentive distortion should it continue rising in value, but actually guarantees a lower level of proof of work security, and a bunch of buzzwords. It does have CAT active, but so do testnets in existence. So even the argument as a testing ground for things built using CAT is just incoherent and a half assed rationalization for a pre-mined token pump.

Calling this a sidechain, or a layer of Bitcoin, is beyond ridiculous. It’s a token scheme, pure and simple. 



Source link

Continue Reading

Opinion

The (Zero-Knowledge Proof) Singularity Is Near

Published

on



The broader impact of proof singularity extends beyond individual blockchain networks, as it paves the way for a more interconnected and scalable Web3 ecosystem. As ZK proofs become faster and more efficient, cross-chain communication and interoperability can be greatly improved, enabling seamless, secure interactions between various blockchain protocols. This could lead to a paradigm shift where data privacy and security are inherently built into the infrastructure, fostering trust and compliance in industries that require rigorous data protection standards, such as healthcare, finance, and supply chain management.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement [ethereumads]

Trending

    wpChatIcon