It seems Bitcoin Cash SV is facing a wave of bad press. This is due to people questioning Craig Wright’s claims about the security of this token. This is due to a Bitcoin SV vulnerability being found. On the 8th of December, 2018, a video surfaced, showing how a user can double-spend their BSV tokens.
In this video, a user by the alias ‘Reizu’ demonstrates how a double-spending attack can be used on the Bitcoin SV blockchain. One of Bitcoin’s most highly valued propositions (as demonstrated by the Bitcoin whitepaper) was its ability to counteract double-spending attacks.
While the majority of media attention regarding a cryptocurrency attack usually revolves around unknown powers making large-scale attacks, this exploit could potentially be far more detrimental. It doesn’t take a genius programmer to execute a double-spend attack. After showing this exploit to the average user, Reizu even describes it in a blog post for educational purposes. He states the main cause for this Bitcoin SV vulnerability is the coins centralized nature.
The ability to spend the same BSV token(s) twice is easy to understand once you’ve got a basic concept of how the BSV confirmation process works. Both Craig Wright and the BSV dev team pride themselves on the tokens almost instant transaction speed. But this 0-confirmation transaction comes at a cost. Once a block of transactions is complete, the block that follows that one confirms the transactions almost 100% of the time.
Reizu confirms this, stating:
After a few mined blocks I discovered that the transactions that were being mined were those that were sent almost always to the same nodes.
As a result, Reizu was able to send almost unlimited transactions to separate nodes on the Bitcoin SV network. This attack is far worse than a generic double-spending attack.
Then I had an idea. What if I send each node a unique transaction? Instead of a double-spending, it would be a kind of four-hundred-and-fifty-spending, one for each node of the BSV network. . .
The face of Bitcoin SV, Craig Wright, took to Twitter prior to the attack, claiming that only miners could be capable of this type of attack. However, they will be risking the block reward at a small chance for a small reward.
Following this, many people on Twitter demanded Craig to explain himself as well as the current situation. However, he simply denied all claims by saying there is no evidence, and it can’t be reproduced without giving any technical explanations. After constant spam from people questioning his authenticity, he eventually set his twitter to private.
At the time of writing, there have been no indications that similar attacks are taking place on the Bitcoin (BTC) network. Or at least, they haven’t succeeded.
Bitcoin SV shot it’s way to the top 10 cryptocurrencies in terms of market capitalization. While this could be a mere ‘blip’ in the development of the cryptocurrency, it certainly isn’t a good look. Bitcoin SV grew due to hash wars, and now it’s been found to have vulnerabilities. Was this Satoshi’s Vision? What do you think of this situation? Do you own any BSV? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!
If you’ve been wondering why iCE3X didn’t list Bitcoin SV on its launch when everyone was asking for it. Now you can see a little bit more the reason why. You can read Token Listing Process on the iCE3X cryptocurrency exchange for more information!
This article is intended to educate and should in no way be seen as investment advice or an enticement to use the ice3x.com platform. Bitcoin is highly volatile with big profit opportunities but you should also remember that you could lose part or all of your investment whenever you take part in any high risk investment. Bitcoin trading is not a regulated industry in South Africa, which in itself carries additional risks. IF YOU ARE NOT AN ASTUTE BITCOIN TRADER, SEEK INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL ADVICE BEFORE MAKING ANY INVESTMENTS.