Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Wrong sentence in motivation #9

Open
binyebarwe opened this issue Mar 14, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Wrong sentence in motivation #9

binyebarwe opened this issue Mar 14, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@binyebarwe
Copy link

The document mentions:
The only current known defense against chip attacks is trying to make the cost of a chip attack as high as possible. To make things worst
This argument is valid, so why is it written (To make things worst). Especially if you consider the Bitcoin model. Bitcoin, besides being based on software, it has an economy behinds it. Bitcoin can be destroyed using economic resources. There are calculations around this:
https://cryptopotato.com/this-is-how-much-you-would-need-to-spend-to-execute-51-attacks-on-bitcoin-and-ethereum/

I do think there needs to be a calculus on how much $ would cost to a chip attack.

There's a possibility that using physics we don't need to rely in an economic incentive, but for now even Bitcoin relies on it.

@sbellem
Copy link
Owner

sbellem commented Mar 14, 2024

Valid point! Will try to reformulate the sentence to make it clearer! The issue is not exactly that relying on economic incentives is a bad thing, but that in the case of chips, the cost of an attack is guessed to be very low in the context of web3 protocols. So, the "To make things worst ..." words build on the guess that the costs of chip attacks is relatively low (e.g. 1 million dollars), but that in addition to being low we don't even have a precise number, and that's why it's worst.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants