Although the Bitcoin Lightning Network solves many problems of slow and expensive payments, it is still far from perfect. Several (theoretical) shortcomings have been discussed in recent months. We have listed the top four, collected by Sharecaster, for you.

Buying 1000 euros of Bitcoin without commission? Get started at Bitvavo
Bitcoin Lightning Network
The Lightning Network consists of a network of payment channels between nodes. These payment channels contain satoshi’s that can be slid back and forth, as it were, just like a chain of beads.

Because only the node of the receiver and the sender have to sign this change of balance and the blockchain is not required, this results in fast payments. Want to learn more about Lightning? Then read our explanation page.

This makes Lightning completely different from on-chain Bitcoin, as everything looks almost the same with the latter at every node. This also ensures that the all-new Lightning Network also has other attack vectors. These are the following four (potential) problems:

1. Griefing
The first attack has become a reality since the roll-out of wumbo channels. Each payment channel passes on payments with hash-time-lock contracts (HTLCs), so to speak. However, they can only ‚hold‘ a few hundred of these HTLCs, and once this limit is reached, the channel freezes.

So in this way, large amounts of funds can be frozen by people flooding this channel with a lot of micropayments. Although you can’t steal the money, this is a problem for huge channels that suddenly have to close down.

You could try to crush competitors in this way. Lightning Service Providers (LSPs) could try to create a monopoly in the liquidity market.

Joost Jager addressed this problem, but also immediately mentioned a solution: a firewall called a ‚circuit breaker‘.

2. Flood and Loot
Two researchers from Hebrew University in Israel investigated another systematic attack on the Lightning Network. Jonah Harris and Aviv Zohar found out that it is possible to steal BTC that is stuck in payment channels by forcing them into the blockchain.

When you send a payment into the network, it is (often) sent over multiple nodes. And these intermediaries in the network can fall victim to a coordinated attack.

If you want to do this, you have to be very quick. Hackers can leave payments ‚in the dark‘ by sending them between two ‚own‘ nodes. In this way you shut down the intermediate payment channels.

In doing so, nodes can really lose their Bitcoin Supreme review Bitcoin, which was not possible in the grievance attack. The two researchers already addressed this problem in June, but fortunately also provided a series of solutions.

3. Time-dilation eclipse
This third possible attack is a „sybil-atack“, where multiple identities are used to overwhelm a network.

If an attacker were to run hundreds of nodes and get all the connections of a lightning node, it could shut down the victim and isolate him from the ‚real‘ network. It can then steal money as soon as it is the only entity that passes on the closing transaction to this ‚central‘ party.

It can then wait to pass it on to the rest of the network. However, this attack must be very coordinated.

4. Pinning attack
Another way of twisting the transaction data is a „pinning attack“. The attacker can block the closing transaction of a channel to individual nodes with different mempools.

There is no such thing as ‚one mempole‘. By setting the closing transaction in such a way that it is not confirmed before the timelock expires, the attacker may mislead the victim into closing the channel in the wrong way.

The solution to this lies with so-called anchor channels. These allow you to dynamically adjust the fee for this closing transaction, making it more likely that miners will still pick it up. But even with this attack you have to deal with the situation on Bitcoin blockchain and the on-chain network.

China Construction Bank used the blockchain to issue the first tranche of a bond package worth 3 billion dollars

China Construction Bank (CCB) worked with a fintech company in Labuan, Malaysia, on the first blockchain bond issue in the history of Chinese financial institutions.

Among the „Big Four“ of the banking system of the People’s Republic of China, CCB is ranked second in the ranking of the world’s largest banks by total assets, according to data from autumn 2020.

With the new issue of blockchain debt securities, the bank plans to raise up to 3 billion dollars in total, starting with a first tranche of 58 million dollars, aimed at private investors and financial institutions. The digital bonds will be issued through an offshore branch of CCB located in Labuan, at a minimum price of $100 each, and will have a maturity of three months. They will pay an annualized interest of 50 basis points above Libor, approximately 0.75%.

The innovation of the operation is that these bonds are used as tokenized certificates of deposit on the blockchain, and this allows the issuance of small securities; bonds not based on the blockchain are typically sold at much higher minimum prices, and are therefore offered almost exclusively to professional investors or other banks.

In addition, tokenized certificates of deposit will be traded on the Fusang exchange, which is regulated in Labuan. The real-time trading of the bonds will start on November 13. It should be noted that since Fusang allows cryptocurrency trading, traders will be able to trade Bitcoins (BTC) with US dollars for the purchase of the bonds, subject to payment of a commission.

Fusang’s CEO, Henry Chong, told reporters that if the bonds are popular, the digital exchange intends to launch similar products denominated in other currencies.

As noted by the Wall Street Journal, an annualized interest rate of 0.75% for bonds is higher than most bank rates offered on dollar deposits.

Residents of the United States and China, as well as companies or individuals in Iran and North Korea, will not be able to purchase the digital security. All proceeds will be deposited at CCB’s offshore branch in Labuan: the WSJ has described the small island as a tax haven.

Steven Wong, chief operating officer of CCB Malaysia, has made it clear that the entity does not deal with „Bitcoin or crypto“, but rather „bank deposits, this is our core business“. Felix Feng Qi, chief operating officer of CCB’s Labuan branch, clarified the innovative scope of the operation by pointing out that this is „the first listed blockchain debt security“.

Ist dies die erste Blockkette, die wirklich mit Visa konkurriert?

Seit sich die Skalierungsprobleme von Bitcoin zum ersten Mal bemerkbar machten, wurde die Blockkettenindustrie vor die Aufgabe gestellt, ein effizienteres System aufzubauen, das das erforderliche Skalierungsniveau erreichen kann, um mit älteren Zahlungssystemen wie Visa zu konkurrieren.

Das Visa-Bezahlsystem, das derzeit durchschnittlich 20.000 gleichzeitige Transaktionen pro Sekunde (tps) abwickelt, gilt weithin als der Maßstab, den eine blockkettenbasierte Krypto-Währung überschreiten muss, um eine wirklich massive Skalierung gegenüber Bitcoin Future und weltweite Akzeptanz zu erreichen. Doch bis vor kurzem blieben selbst die fortschrittlichsten Plattformen noch hinter diesem Ziel zurück.

Mit der Einführung von Velas, der weltweit ersten sich autonom entwickelnden Blockkette, verfügt die Branche nun über eine Plattform, die wirklich mit Visa konkurrieren kann. Doch bevor wir lernen, wie sie funktioniert, wollen wir einen Blick auf das Skalierungsproblem werfen, wie es sich derzeit darstellt.

Das Ausmaß des Problems

Gegenwärtig ist die überwiegende Mehrheit der Blockketten-Plattformen nur in der Lage, irgendwo in der Größenordnung von 5 bis 120 tps zu verarbeiten. Dies reicht von nur 6-8 tps für Bitcoin, 10-14 tps für Ethereum und etwa 100-116 tps für Bitcoin Cash.

Andere, neuere Plattformen wie Tron und EOS haben einen maximalen Durchsatz von ca. 2.000 tps bzw. 4.000 tps. Damit sind sie weitaus schneller als Blockketten der ersten Generation wie Bitcoin, aber immer noch massiv niedriger als die 20.000 tps, die erforderlich sind, um mit Visa zu konkurrieren.

Um wirklich in der Lage zu sein, Transaktionen in der Größenordnung von Visa abzuwickeln, muss eine Blockkette nicht nur in der Lage sein, mindestens 20.000 gleichzeitige Transaktionen abzuwickeln, sondern sie muss auch in der Lage sein, innerhalb von Sekunden die Endgültigkeit der Transaktionen zu erreichen – und das alles unter Beibehaltung der gleichen Sicherheit und Dezentralisierung, die die Nutzer von blockkettenbasierten Plattformen erwarten.

Obwohl eine Vielzahl von Skalierungslösungen der zweiten Ebene vorgeschlagen wurden, wie das Bitcoin Lightning Network, das Raiden Network von Ethereum und verschiedene Sidechain-Lösungen – wie die flüssige Sidechain von Blockstream und die Ethereum Plasma-Kindketten -, konnte bisher noch keine die richtige Mischung aus Skalierbarkeit, Sicherheit und Dezentralisierung demonstrieren.

Infolgedessen ist die Entwicklung dieser Optionen entweder ins Stocken geraten oder die Akzeptanz in der Gemeinschaft ist langsam – während einige sogar argumentiert haben, dass die Blockchain-Technologie einfach nicht skalierbar ist und dass eine alternative dezentrale Technologie wie ein gerichteter azyklischer Graph (DAG) einen besseren Weg in die Zukunft darstellen könnte.

Die Velas-Lösung

Einer der Hauptgründe dafür, dass die meisten populären Blockketten ihre Skalierung trotz jahrelanger Betriebsdauer immer noch nicht wesentlich verbessert haben, liegt in der Geschwindigkeit der Innovation und der Upgrades, die sie sehen – was für die meisten Plattformen unglaublich langsam ist.

Damit beispielsweise neue Upgrades auf das Bitcoin-Netzwerk angewendet werden können, muss eine Mehrheit der Bitcoin-Mineure die Änderungen genehmigen, wie sie in einem Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) dargelegt sind. Dieser Prozess kann Monate oder sogar Jahre dauern, während wirklich drastische Aktualisierungen – wie die zur Erzielung einer Massenskalierung erforderliche Art – zu einer Spaltung der Gemeinschaft führen können, die zu einer Kettenspaltung führt, wenn eine bedeutende Gruppe von Bergleuten den Vorschlag ablehnt.

Um dieses Problem zu überwinden, verwendet Velas – eine Blockkette mit ultrahohem Durchsatz – einen branchenweit ersten Selbstlern- und Selbstoptimierungsansatz, der es ermöglicht, sich im Laufe der Zeit ständig zu verbessern, ohne dass umstrittene größere Aktualisierungen erforderlich sind, die die Gemeinschaft spalten könnten. Um dies zu erreichen, verwendet Velas künstliche Intelligenz, um seinen einzigartigen Konsens-Algorithmus (bekannt als Artificial Intuition Delegated Proof of Stake) ständig zu verbessern, und setzt neuronale Netzwerke ein, um die optimalen Belohnungen für Knotenpunktbetreiber zu berechnen und die Entdeckungszeit zu blockieren, um den Durchsatz zu maximieren und gleichzeitig die Sicherheit vor Angriffen zu gewährleisten.

Dieses System ermöglicht es Velas, branchenführende 30.000 tps zu erreichen und aufrechtzuerhalten – und stellt damit den von allen wichtigen Krypto-Währungen und Visa angebotenen Durchsatz in den Schatten.

La notizia della scoperta di circa 40 milioni di once troy d’oro nella regione siberiana russa aumenterà probabilmente la redditività del più grande produttore d’oro del paese, aggiungendo al contempo l’offerta della risorsa „scarsa“. I rapporti dicono che il Polyus possedeva il Sukhoi Log contiene 540 milioni di tonnellate di minerale, che si traduce in una media di 2,3 grammi per tonnellata. Le riserve, che rappresenteranno un quarto delle riserve auree della Russia, genereranno probabilmente $ 76 miliardi di entrate per Polyus quando si utilizzano i prezzi correnti.

Come Bitcoin confronta con l’oro

Sebbene l‘ annuncio di Sukhoi Log si aggiunga alle riserve comprovate e alle scorte di oro, non è chiaro come ciò influenzerà il prezzo del metallo nell’immediato e nel breve termine. Tuttavia, è probabile che l’oro che è stato tradizionalmente utilizzato come copertura contro l’inflazione aumenti di valore con l’aumento dell’offerta di moneta. Il comportamento del metallo prezioso contrasta con quello del bitcoin, un asset che sembra esibire una relazione inversa tra la sua offerta (o azione) circolante e il suo prezzo.

Con circa 18,5 milioni di monete – su una fornitura fissa totale di 21 milioni – già estratte e circolanti, gli investitori istituzionali ne detengono quasi il 4%, secondo bitcointreasuries.org . Tuttavia, poiché più investitori istituzionali si uniscono al carrozzone delle società che acquistano bitcoin, la conseguente contrazione dell’offerta aiuterà il prezzo dell’asset digitale a salire ulteriormente.

Per illustrare, proprio prima che Square Inc acquisisse 4.709 bitcoin per circa $ 50 milioni, l’asset digitale veniva scambiato a circa $ 10.500. Tuttavia, tra l’acquisto di bitcoin di Square e il periodo successivo al grande annuncio di Paypal il 22 ottobre, il valore della moneta è salito a un nuovo massimo di $ 13.300. Al momento della scrittura, il bitcoin oscilla intorno a $ 13.000. Per Square Inc, ciò significa che in meno di un mese le sue riserve di bitcoin sono aumentate di valore da $ 50 milioni a oltre $ 61 milioni. Scala di grigi e Microstrategy, che hanno anche acquisito quantità significative di bitcoin, hanno visto crescere di valore le proprie riserve.

Nel frattempo, la crescente chiarezza normativa sulle risorse digitali significa che più grandi società probabilmente acquisiranno bitcoin rendendolo ancora più scarso. Per i bitcoiners, questa approvazione del bitcoin da parte di investitori più grandi e il suo successivo aumento di valore conferma la loro tesi di lunga data secondo cui questo nuovo asset supera l’oro quando si tratta di preservare il valore. Inoltre, questa narrativa sta ricevendo sostegno da un elenco crescente di studi che affermano o classificano il bitcoin come una riserva di valore migliore e una risorsa a prova di inflazione rispetto all’oro.

Supporto documentario per la narrativa alternativa allo Store of Value

News.Bitcoin.com ha precedentemente riportato uno studio Bistamp che conclude che il bitcoin ha la meglio sull’oro perché si comporta bene anche in tempi di aumento dei tassi di interesse reali. L’oro sembra funzionare meglio durante i periodi inflazionistici. Allo stesso modo, Fidelity Digital Assets ha scritto una tesi di investimento in bitcoin in due parti in cui discute gli attributi chiave dell’asset digitale che sono allettanti per gli investitori istituzionali. Questi studi (così come molti altri) riconoscono l’importanza dell’offerta fissa di bitcoin nel tracciare la traiettoria di questo asset digitale.

Popular wallets and other privacy enhancing technologies were identified as threats in Europol’s latest crypto report.

With the IOCTA (Internet Organized Crime Threat Assessment), Europol has set up a department that investigates cyber threats. In a recent report the authorities take stock.

Trade Bitcoin on Plus500

Trade Bitcoin, Ethereum, Ripple, IOTA and the most famous cryptocurrencies (CFD) securely on Plus500.

Why Plus500? Leading CFD trading platform; 40,000 EUR demo account; Mobile trading app; strong lever; large selection of different financial products (cryptocurrencies, gold stocks, commodities, ETFs, forex, indices).

The investigators are rather critical of the increasing spread of crypto currencies. The 64-page report said they eased payments for various forms of cybercrime. The Bitcoin System platform sees developments in relation to private-sector crypto-coins and services as particularly problematic.

The IOCTA report concludes that the reliability of the blockchain and the irreversibility of transactions, as well as the associated anonymity, make it easier for cybercriminals to proceed. It is even from one

Standard payment method for payments made by victims to criminals as part of ransom and other extortion programs, as well as for payments from criminals to criminals on the dark web the speech.

Most recently, the Pricacy Wallet Wasabi came into focus at Europol . The investigators had determined that almost a third of the Wasabi transactions could be linked to darknet transactions.

Europol recognizes the goodwill of the providers in the fight against crime

Investigators say it is difficult to locate cybercrime in comparison to other criminal practices. Because criminals could do a lot of damage with a relatively small investment. From 4 million sextortion emailsI was able to extract 12,500 Bitcoin addresses. It is true that “only” 245 of these actually received a payment. For a “low budget fraud” the maneuver was nevertheless very lucrative. Typical ransomware attacks are much more profitable, but also more complex to implement.

As more and more private individuals use cryptocurrencies, it is obvious that the number of potential victims is also increasing. For 2019, the IOCTA report lists ten publicly confirmed hacks from exchanges where criminals have stolen cryptocurrencies. The total damage amounts to 240 million euros.

This problem is known to the private providers and in many places appropriate safety precautions have already been taken. However, Europol criticizes that not every company cooperates sufficiently with investigators to put a stop to fraudsters.

However, the report praises the fact that the crypto exchanges in particular have further strengthened their know-your-customer measures (KYC). Not only the operators, but also the media are ultimately obliged by the IOCTA to provide information about the risks associated with cryptocurrencies.