<p>With unlimited money, you could destroy almost anything. I don't really see why it matters. If someone with unlimited money spends a few billion dollars to destroy Bitcoin, we'll just create Bitcoin2 and maybe he'll spend another few billion destroying that. We can keep creating new crypto-currencies indefinitely. If each one gets a few billion dollars out of the hands of some evil entity, that's a win in my book.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-26T14:37:15.100Z
Doesn't work this way: if you destroy one currency, the trust in the next one would be back at zero...
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-26T18:22:02.370Z
Quite the reverse, the inflow of billions of dollars will spur *massive* interest among people trying to get a piece of that money.
David Schwartz
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-27T09:41:13.447Z
Oh, if you put it that way, that makes sense!
o0'.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-26T11:31:55.347Z
2013-03-26T11:31:55.347Z
David Schwartz
<p>In fact they can. Somebody who could raise 20x of the entire network's computing power can rerun the transaction history from the beginning, throwing out any transactions they don't like. So long as the rest of the transactions are consistent, they should be able to gain the trunk blockchain line. This would make the entire blockchain we have been running up to this point a very large split.</p>

<p>See <a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3343/what-is-the-longest-blockchain-fork-that-has-been-orphaned-to-date">What is the longest blockchain fork that has been orphaned to date?</a> for a few details.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-10-29T19:25:39.493Z
2015-10-29T19:25:39.493Z
2017-04-13T12:47:34.187Z
Joshua
<p>I was reading this interesting discussion in the comments section on ZH where this guy was talking about how a single entity (think corrupt government and banksters) can throw money and processing power at will at the network to successfully manage a 51% attack or just cause havoc in the system by sending incorrect network messages, such as denying valid transactions or allowing invalid transactions. </p>

<p>The initial part of the discussion quoted here</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Assume I'm a completely unscrupulous and ammoral person, for example,
  and I want to shut down bitcoin.  Here are the ways I would attempt to
  do it.</p>
  
  <ol>
  <li>Write a virus to mine bit coins and spread it across the internet.</li>
  <li>Write a virus to steal bit coins, and spread it across the internet.</li>
  <li>Write a virus to act as part of the bitcoin network, and deny
  transactions that are valid</li>
  <li>Write a virus to act as part of the bitcoin network to approve
  transactions that are invalid.</li>
  <li>Dump the bit coins I mined as part of step #1 and #2 on the market</li>
  <li>Create a mania in bitcoins by dumping billions into buying bitcoins
  after doing step #5</li>
  <li>Associate it with terrorism</li>
  <li>Associate it with drugs</li>
  <li>Claim that people like me are manipulating it</li>
  </ol>
  
  <p>And that's just off the top of my head.</p>
  
  <p>I gots unlimited money.  I am working in a market that is unregulated.
  I run the government or own it.  Try to stop me.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Here is a link to that discussion. 
<a href="http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-25/bitcoin-mania-accelerates?page=2#comment-3373165" rel="nofollow">http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-25/bitcoin-mania-accelerates?page=2#comment-3373165</a></p>

<p>Can someone please comment on whether this is possible and if not, how does the bitcoin algorithm/ecosystem counter such an attack</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-26T05:18:14.433Z
Can you quote the comment? Your link doesn't take me to it.
Nick ODell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-26T05:18:52.017Z
Very similar to [Can a 51% attack be detected and dealt with?](http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1061/can-a-51-attack-be-detected-and-dealt-with)
Nick ODell
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-26T09:05:41.903Z
@NickODell i've clarified the question further. i guess the question is not ALL about a 51% attack like i posted earlier.
Abbas Gadhia
<security><weaknesses><majority-attack><government>
Can someone with an unlimited amount of money compromize the network?
Abbas Gadhia
# Can someone with an unlimited amount of money compromize the network?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-03-26)

I was reading this interesting discussion in the comments section on ZH where this guy was talking about how a single entity (think corrupt government and banksters) can throw money and processing power at will at the network to successfully manage a 51% attack or just cause havoc in the system by sending incorrect network messages, such as denying valid transactions or allowing invalid transactions.

The initial part of the discussion quoted here

> Assume I'm a completely unscrupulous and ammoral person, for example,
> and I want to shut down bitcoin. Here are the ways I would attempt to
> do it.
>
> 1. Write a virus to mine bit coins and spread it across the internet.
> 2. Write a virus to steal bit coins, and spread it across the internet.
> 3. Write a virus to act as part of the bitcoin network, and deny
>    transactions that are valid
> 4. Write a virus to act as part of the bitcoin network to approve
>    transactions that are invalid.
> 5. Dump the bit coins I mined as part of step #1 and #2 on the market
> 6. Create a mania in bitcoins by dumping billions into buying bitcoins
>    after doing step #5
> 7. Associate it with terrorism
> 8. Associate it with drugs
> 9. Claim that people like me are manipulating it
>
> And that's just off the top of my head.
>
> I gots unlimited money. I am working in a market that is unregulated.
> I run the government or own it. Try to stop me.

Here is a link to that discussion.
<http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-03-25/bitcoin-mania-accelerates?page=2#comment-3373165>

Can someone please comment on whether this is possible and if not, how does the bitcoin algorithm/ecosystem counter such an attack

**Tags:** security, weaknesses, majority-attack, government

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Can you quote the comment? Your link doesn't take me to it.  
> **username_1**: Very similar to [Can a 51% attack be detected and dealt with?](http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/1061/can-a-51-attack-be-detected-and-dealt-with)  
> **username_0**: @username_1 i've clarified the question further. i guess the question is not ALL about a 51% attack like i posted earlier.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2013-03-26. Score: 4

With unlimited money, you could destroy almost anything. I don't really see why it matters. If someone with unlimited money spends a few billion dollars to destroy Bitcoin, we'll just create Bitcoin2 and maybe he'll spend another few billion destroying that. We can keep creating new crypto-currencies indefinitely. If each one gets a few billion dollars out of the hands of some evil entity, that's a win in my book.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Doesn't work this way: if you destroy one currency, the trust in the next one would be back at zero...  
> **username_2**: Quite the reverse, the inflow of billions of dollars will spur *massive* interest among people trying to get a piece of that money.  
> **username_3**: Oh, if you put it that way, that makes sense!  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2015-10-29. Score: 2

In fact they can. Somebody who could raise 20x of the entire network's computing power can rerun the transaction history from the beginning, throwing out any transactions they don't like. So long as the rest of the transactions are consistent, they should be able to gain the trunk blockchain line. This would make the entire blockchain we have been running up to this point a very large split.

See [What is the longest blockchain fork that has been orphaned to date?](https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/3343/what-is-the-longest-blockchain-fork-that-has-been-orphaned-to-date) for a few details.


---

