Monero (XMR) suffers 51% attack, Kraken stops deposits

The blockchain was aimed at the privacy of users, saw one of the mine pools take over the hash rate of the network.

No damage has been reported yet, but history suggests that extensive losses can occur once the damage has been caused.

Check the control

The cryptocurrency exchange cracking temporarily stopped the Monero deposits to the platform due to the continuous attack of 51% on the privacy-oriented blockchain.

This attack is made possible when a single mining tentity controls more than 50% of the network rate of the network (the computing power that is needed to validate transactions), so that they can re-spend double (ie unauthorized production and expenses and expenses of money) and re-order transactions on the Blockchain-Grootboek.

This was marked on Friday by the exchange and from the moment of writing a new update has been posted:

“Monero (XMR) Deposits have been re-enabled and now require 720 confirmations before crediting. Given the current uncertainty surrounding the monero network protection due to a significant consolidation of hash rate under a single entity, cracking deposits can stop at any time and the creditor postponing.”

The mine pool that is responsible for the disruption is Qubisch, a blockchain that houses an AI model with the name Aigarth. According to a message on their blog, this was one experiment They performed earlier last week and they claimed that this was possible through unique consensus models that were available in their chain. This was intended to prove that the Monero network is not safe enough and that the Validators of Qubic should be responsible for securing it in the future.

They further stated that the core functionality of the “Monero Network remains intact. The privacy, speed and usability are not affected.”

The team behind the blockchain network has not yet confirmed or refused after effects of the attack. At the time of the press, the native token, XMR, acts around $ 276, even 4% in the day, not influenced by the event.

Previous examples of such attacks

Although it is still early to determine whether this controversial attack will have effects on the blockchain, there have been earlier scenarios in which the consequences have been quite harmful.

Ethereum Classic (etc.), A split from the Ethereum (ETH) blockchain that we know today is the “classic” version of the chain that was initially launched in 2015. Between 2019 and 2020, the network suffered two 51% attacks with double spending, which resulted in more than $ 6 million in losses.

Another spin-off, Bitcoin Gold (BTG), the “user-friendly” alternative to Bitcoin (BTC), underwent A double -saving attack in 2018, resulting in a loss of About $ 18 million.

The majority of this type of attack has decreased in recent years, mainly due to technological progress, blockchain -upgrades and improvements in consensus models. As noted above, we still have to see the impact of this most recent infringement on network security.