3 ms·

You could be right! Do you have any evidence, research, or other supporting arguments that show what you're claiming?

• tromp 5y ago
  See https://docs.chia.net/docs/03consensus/foliage/ https://docs.chia.net/docs/03consensus/foliage/ "farmers could theoretically create a foliage re-org where foliage is replaced" As you can see, Chia devs consider this an impractical attack. But it's definitely a weaker security guarantee than what PoW provides.
  • Glench 5y ago
    Ah, thanks for the link! It seems what you're saying is right — the security guarantees of Chia are not the EXACT same as Bitcoin, but it's not clear to me that this means they're "weaker" for the reason you described. > As soon as one honest farmer has added a foliage block, the foliage becomes impossible to re-org beyond that height with the same PoSpace With ~350k Chia full nodes, the likelihood of colluding farmers being able to pull this off is a lot lower than if there were only the ~14k full nodes of Bitcoin, no? And Chia is still pretty new — it had a maximum of ~750k full nodes before. I guess it's kind of a trade-off, huh? Bitcoin's big centralized pools are a worrying source of attack that's not there in Chia (the official pooling protocol has the farmers sign blocks so it's completely decentralized and pools using it can't orchestrate attacks). https://docs.chia.net/docs/11pooling/pooling https://docs.chia.net/docs/11pooling/pooling