Ripple.com goes Down while CTO says, No Blockchain Better Protected against Hostile Major Attack than XRP Ledger
Since going to $0.430 in late-December, the third-largest cryptocurrency hasn’t been able to make some good moves. While the altcoins are surging like crazy, especially Litecoin and EOS with Ethereum showing much potential as well, XRP hasn’t been able to see a good surge, even though it has the much-anticipated and talked about listing on Coinbase.
While some coins have gone 100 percent up from their December loss, XRP is only risen about 20 percent form $0.283 to its highest point at 0.341 in late February.
XRP Price chart, Source: Coinmarketcap
Meanwhile, the website of Ripple.com was down less than 24-hours back which could have been due to some issue with the WordPress as Nik Bougalis, cryptographer and C++ team leader at Ripple took the opportunity to call out,
“It’s just a simple website outage, as far as I know. The important thing is, regardless of whether http://ripple.com is up or down, the XRP Ledger is still processing transactions and closing ledgers every four seconds.”
This started when Roben Somsen, the co-host of Unhashed podcast questioned if XRP Ledger can be exploited in respect to a certain mechanism, “Ripple nodes skip validation if they're more than 100 blocks (~20 min) behind and 80% of the validators agree the blocks are valid. It seems to me validators could exploit this – halt the chain, then skip fake signatures.”
In response, Schwartz said that “all PoW systems are vulnerable” to double spends and that there's nothing that can be done to fix it.
“No blockchain that I know of has better protection against a hostile majority attack than the XRP Ledger does. Bitcoin will happily allow double spends if the majority of mining power is in hostile hands.”
“If a double spend attack on bitcoin reduces the value of bitcoin, all bitcoins are affected no matter how old they are. And people who actually use bitcoin for something other than speculation are at the most risk. “Don't use the system” isn't a good mitigation.”
He further called PoW a dead end for decentralization and security which is only leading to more centralization. He emphasized that distributed agreement, on the other hand, has become more decentralized.
PoW has been a dead end for both decentralization and security, It's gotten more centralized and we've seen 51% double spend attacks. By contrast, distributed agreement has gotten more decentralized and it's clear how to mitigate these attacks in software. 2/3
— David Schwartz (@JoelKatz) March 8, 2019
Ho, according to Crypto51, it is not easy to attack the Bitcoin network rather exactly opposite and extremely expensive as it would require $292,255 an hour to gather the resources to attack the Bitcoin network. Also be sure to check out our Ripple price prediction page for more analysis and insights regarding the XRP coin and community.