Creating a double consumption attack: a threat to Ethereum safety
Ethereum, like all other blockchain networks, is based on encryption techniques designed to prevent attacks such as double costs. However, a special threat can use the safety of these mechanisms.
In Bitcoin, an imitation pattern attack is a kind of attack in which the attacker finds a specific insert (model), which produces a specific cool (y) jam. To avoid this, the Bitcoin network uses the encryption function called Sala-256 to create a shortcut “X. The challenge is to find two different ratesxand" y so that “hash (x) == hash (y).
The consensus mechanism of the contract with Merle to Merle has a similar problem. When creating a new event (TX), it must be decentralized in a way that ensures its uniqueness and prevents attacks such as double costs.
TX replacement with Merle: Double consumer attack
The question in Crypto.se emphasizes the exchange of one block (or event) in Merle. It can potentially create a double consumption attack in which the attacker creates two separate events that use the same feed and departure.
It can work:
- The attacker finds an existing event in the "TX" network Ethereum.
- The attacker replaces "TX" with a new event "TX" ", which has the same income, but different results.
- Merle Tree is updated to think about changing TX.
- Another user, "U, wants to spend his ether (‘Eth
)tx`.
Because both events use the same channel and printing, the process of checking the correctness of the network is kept by a different event. As a result, “U” will receive two separate ETH awards for celebrating ether twice.
** why this threat is
In Ethereum, each block is connected by the unique shortcut of its predecessor (“Merle root”). Merle Wood allows programmers to create a cumulative property certificate by decentralizing events in a row. However, when the attacker replaces the Merle event, they can create a new unit, which from the original block.
If the replaced event was then used, the network will make it correct, because both its contribution and the input dispersion correspond to the original event. This creates a script for a double consumer attack, in which two users are awarded for the ether to issue twice.
Mitage is a threat
Although this may seem a serious threat to Ethereum safety, this double consumption attack is theoretically possible, but difficult to implement without advanced encryption and blockchain mechanics.
To alleviate this risk, the programming team standing behind Ethereum took several funds:
- MERKLECH wood structure : Merle Tree ensures that each block is associated by the unique abbreviation of its predecessor.
2
3.
To sum up, while creating a double consumption attack is theoretically possible, it is still a theoretical threat due to solid security measures implemented by the Ethereum group.
