Transform your $HAI holdings into Hacken shareholder status. Only 100 slots available. > Learn more and join the waitlist here.
In the landscape of Web3, the 51% attack stands out among other blockchain security vulnerabilities. It’s an exploit that undermines the core principle of decentralization in blockchain, allowing hackers to manipulate transactions, exemplified by the notorious $18 million double-spend attack on Bitcoin Gold.
This article takes an in-depth look at this vulnerability, unfolding its working mechanisms, potential risks, and security measures.
A 51% attack is an attack on a blockchain network where a single entity gains control of more than half (51%) of its staking or computational power. This disproportionate control allows them to implement substantial changes, contravening the decentralization principle fundamental to the blockchain. In other words, a 51% attack gives the power to rewrite tx history, prevent tx completion, stop rewards to validators, and double spend.
It’s important to note that a 51% attack is among the most significant security threats to blockchains, particularly those utilizing Proof-of-Work and Delegated Proof-of-Stake consensus algorithms. One alarming outcome of such an attack is a double-spending, where the same coins are spent more than once, damaging the trust and reliability of the blockchain.
Diving deeper into the mechanics of a 51% attack, let’s explore the step-by-step process an attacker follows to gain and exploit control over a blockchain network. While the exact specifics of an attack can vary depending on several factors, here’s a simplified, general sequence of events that typically characterizes such an attack:
It’s worth noting that a 51% attack is not an easy task, it requires a significant amount of resources and time. This hefty financial and technical load makes it unaffordable for most people.
The bulk of the cost lies in the required mining equipment. To control over half of a network’s hash power, you need a lot of high-performance hardware, running into millions of dollars for prominent blockchains like Bitcoin.
But it’s not just about hardware. Mining consumes a lot of energy. Bitcoin mining used up to 95.58 TWh yearly, which is on par with the annual energy consumption of Finland with over 5.5 million people. So, there are significant electricity and maintenance costs to consider.
Apart from the high costs, timing is crucial for a group planning an attack on the network. They need to control more than half of the network and introduce their altered blockchain at the perfect moment. If the attack fails, the hackers could lose everything.
On top of that, in a decentralized environment, there is no central authority to enforce the use of a compromised chain. Validators and clients can agree to restart the chain from a point before the attack occurred, although it would be messy and undesirable.
The high costs and risks associated with such an attack serve as a strong deterrent, particularly for larger networks like Bitcoin or Ethereum. On the other hand, smaller blockchains don’t have as much mining power, making them more vulnerable. But it’s easier to rent mining power for a few hours from a service like Nicehash to hack these smaller networks, which cuts down the cost of the attack significantly.
A successful attack can have significant implications for a blockchain network and its users. Here’s what happens:
Throughout the history of blockchain, there have been a few notable such cases:
These raids demonstrate significant vulnerabilities and consequences, reinforcing the need for effective security measures.
Mitigating these risks can be challenging, but various methods have been proposed:
Switching to a different consensus algorithm serves as a viable approach in reducing the likelihood of 51% attacks. Proof of Work (PoW), the initial consensus mechanism employed by many blockchains, renders itself susceptible to such attacks due to its mining concentration risk.
Alternatively, the Proof of Stake (PoS) consensus mechanism is less prone to such attacks as it requires a hacker to possess the majority of the blockchain’s total stake, often a prohibitively expensive venture.
Another effective deterrent involves delaying blockchain confirmations. This method buys time for the network to detect and potentially ward off a 51% attack. By extending the transaction confirmation time, attackers would need to sustain control over 51% of the network for a more extended period, dramatically increasing the cost and difficulty of such an attack.
Instituting a penalty system serves as another viable defensive strategy. For instance, the application of slashing conditions in PoS blockchains penalizes malicious actors by confiscating a portion or all of their staked tokens if they are found to be acting against the network’s rules. This punitive measure significantly raises the stakes for any would-be attackers and can serve as a potent deterrent.
Lastly, regular blockchain protocol audits are a crucial aspect of any comprehensive security strategy. These audits meticulously scrutinize the protocol to detect vulnerabilities, including potential avenues for a 51% attack. By identifying and addressing these weaknesses proactively, blockchain developers can considerably reinforce their network’s defenses.
While the risk of a 51% attack is a daunting thought, it’s essential to understand that the costs and complexity of carrying out such an attack make them rare. However, the potential impact and the historical precedents emphasize the importance of proactive preventive measures and continuous efforts toward making blockchain technology more secure and resilient.
The future of Web3 depends on our ability to tackle these challenges, turning vulnerabilities into strengths and creating a more robust and secure digital future for all.
Subscribe to our newsletter
Enter your email address to subscribe to Hacken Reseach and receive notifications of new posts by email.