You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Fact: Steemit Sybil Attacked the Steem Blockchain

in #steem5 years ago

I don't see the point of saying that STEEM got sybil attacked. It doesn't play in STEEM's favor, even though it's not really the case. You don't need 65M steem to execute a sybil attack xD

But basically, you think it's better to ask everyone's passports like voice so we could be 'more sybil resistant'? Or reduce the number of max witness votes to 1?

Sort:  

The point is if it got Sybil attacked, we have to improve how we validate witnesses as actually being individual entities. To launch as successful Sybil attack (to date), apparently you do.

No, I don't think "everybody" but maybe some type of advanced reputation system for witnesses that have some kind mechanism for determining the likelihood that the witnesses are individually controlled or part of a sybil attempt.

I've been thinking about some of this stuff for a while: https://twitter.com/lukestokes/status/1236697082653822978

I don't know if 1t1v or max votes of 1 is the answer, but I hope something is better than what we have now.

I agree @lukestokes , this will help to brainstorm different ways to avoid this situation in the future. Perhaps placing an obligatory restriction that witnesses could not be created on same datacenters, same servers, etc.

Perhaps a rule on the smart contract similar to PROSPECTORS Gold game that their is like a police. So, when someone makes an attack like this one or similar types, all the stake being powered up is frozen for lets say 1 year, or even according to the type of attacks, it gets frozen more or less amount of time. Your thoughts?