Bitcoin Core Devs falsely claimed this week that nearly 40% of the knot nodes (Core's biggest competitor) counted twice, giving the wrong impression of their actual size.
Citing technical critiques of the number of reachable nodes running knots, they argued that 39% of nodes (1,758 of 4,468) were double counted due to “a civil attack designed to inflate the number of knot users.”
In the context, two most popular versions of software for Bitcoin Node operators are cores, with an advantage of about 80-88%, followed by a knot. Advantages of about 12-19%.
The exact percentage depends on the estimation method.
Read more: Cøbra warns that knots can threaten Core's reference status
Claiming 2/5 of knot nodes is fake
Bitcoin developer SuperTestNet promoted skepticism on Monday about the amount of knot nodes connected to the internet.
He easily believed that the node operator found evidence that he artificially inflated the number of nodes running the software.
Coin-like node tracking dashboard. Dance estimates 19% of nodes on the Bitcoin network. However, SuperTestnet claimed that Proknot Sybil Attackers was inflated those numbers.
After unreplicating the data, he insisted on real control of the knot It may be close to 12.3%.
Other observers were skeptical that meaningful cibil attacks were occurring in favor of the knot.
On the contrary, the rise in knot nodes was “mainly all organic,” and could have been consistent with ideological disagreements about hardware purchases and the adoption of core driving knots.
Another skeptic in the SuperTestNet analysis zoomed out to a larger time frame to visually demonstrate the natural trending increase in knots.
Better explanation of “Most of the recent gaps”
Soon, Bitcoin Hardware Company Start9 got caught up in an analysis of SuperTestNet. Explain that of SuperTestNet's 1,758 suspicious Sybil nodes, up to 1,000 are not actually sybil nodes From its own storefront.
Data from Start9 has led SuperTestNet to retract most of its previous claims. Callebtc, who briefly celebrated Supertestnet's suspicious statistics, deleted his congratulatory post.
Civil attacks on Bitcoin networks involve running fake or duplicate nodes controlled by the same person to obtain an unbalanced effect on statistics or transaction propagation.
People can use Sybil Tactics to trick users into connecting with nodes and highlighting more important influences than they actually are.
Sometimes, cibil attacks are relatively harmless. For example, in 2015, it denounced chain analysis for carrying out a cibil attack by manipulating fake nodes to geolocate several Bitcoin users.
The effort had no relation to affecting transaction propagation or node control statistics.
In the case of knots, if a cibil attack is truly occurring, then the leader is Perhaps the motivation to promote knots as a viable alternative to the core. However, whether or not a cibil attack will occur is a matter of ongoing debate.
