In POS coins there is a slashing penalty for people who vote in both chains. But this can be avoided by voting in a very deep reorg and withdrawing your deposit on the main chain so that if the attack fails you cannot be punished 'slashed' .
https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Proof-of-Stake-FAQ
To solve this problem, we introduce a "revert limit" - a rule that nodes must simply refuse to revert further back in time than the deposit length (i.e. in our example, four months), and we additionally require nodes to log on at least once every deposit length to have a secure view of the chain. Note that this rule is different from every other consensus rule in the protocol, in that it means that nodes may come to different conclusions depending on when they saw certain messages.
ABC reorg protection is a revert limit and results in 'weak subjectivity' this is the security compromise Ethereum has to make to get rid of mining and POW and thus gain the environmental and decentralization benefits of POS ( no asics & validators in different regions ).
Why are people ok with this hybrid-pow consensus system, it makes a compromise on security while having all the negatives of POW - that is wasting resources and the centralization in hardware and mining pools?
It seems like the hybrid-pow model bitcoin ABC implemented offers the worst of both worlds, BCH should either switch to POS or move to POW completely.
[link] [comments]
source https://www.reddit.com/r/btc/comments/fbpatb/what_is_weak_subjectivity/
No comments:
Post a Comment