JackTheMimic's avatar
JackTheMimic 5 months ago
Because 29% of BTC nodes are hosted on AWS. This signature detection would kill the VMs running Core on those servers. Meaning 29% of the network suddenly goes offline.

Replies (15)

JackTheMimic's avatar
JackTheMimic 5 months ago
Absolutely. But there's ownership risk then there's intentional disruption. I mean if someone found an exploit to target node runners through their specific ISP *cough* Shinobi *cough* that would also be bad and tough to mitigate.
JackTheMimic's avatar
JackTheMimic 5 months ago
I am not talking existential. I am talking adoption progress.
JackTheMimic's avatar
JackTheMimic 5 months ago
For exchanges that use them for feerate, for economic nodes for transaction broadcast utility, for miners for gossip relay, kind of a lot of things.
JackTheMimic's avatar
JackTheMimic 5 months ago
It absolutely does. I have pulled their docs many times to show their guard dog service kills VMs if malware is signature identified. I feel like you may be thinking first order effects and not secondary and terceary effects. I swear I am not as dumb as I look, and I don't take Luke, Mechanic, Murch, Antoine, Voskiul, or any other dev or talking head at face value. I take what they say and check it for validity.
JackTheMimic's avatar
JackTheMimic 5 months ago
When you have to validate the content, also genius.
These docs? And we've gone over the whackamole with malware signatures. My previous company worked the red team for DoD. I promise you don't understand the cloud like you think you might. I also welcome all AWS bitcoin nodes failing. My sats remain safe.
โ†‘