Bitcoin is more vulnerable to a 51% attack of what is believed, Ethereum developer warns

A main developer of Ethereum claims to attack Bitcoin It is cheaper than compromising the network of Eth, and that this will be much more evident to the bad actors in the coming years.

***

• Justin Drake ensures that a 51% attack on Bitcoin It would cost USD $ 10,000 million
  
• ANDn contrast, the system Pos of Ethereum allows a social defense line against attackers
  
• Is it really safer Ethereum than Bitcoin facing a 51%attack?

This week, a main developer of the protocol of Ethereum again rekindle the debate on network security compared to others, stating that it is cheaper to launch a 51% attack on Blockchain of Bitcoin than to Eth.

Justin Drake, researcher at the Ethereum Foundation and one of the architects of the event known as The Mergehe argued that currently “It would be much cheaper to attack Bitcoin with 51% “ than to the intelligent contract network. As explained in an interview with Cointelegraph, The estimated cost to carry out this attack would be of the order of the USD $ 10,000 million.

This type of attack occurs when a group or entity controls more than 50% of the mining power or participation of a network Blockchain, which allows you to manipulate transactions, stop payments and reorganize blocks, putting the integrity of the system at risk.

A debate that divides the crypto community

Drake is not the only one who has addressed the subject. On May 14, Grant Hummer – confounder of Etherealize, A firm focused on products Ethereum— published in X that Bitcoin “It is completely fucked due to your security budget”. According to its calculations, a successful attack would cost USD $ 8,000 million, although there could be a real threat just with an investment of USD $ 2,000 million in BTC For this purpose.

Hummer assured that “This will be blindingly obvious during the next decade” And he added that “ETH is the only truly decentralized cryptoactive that can become the Internet value reserve.”

These comments have generated answers found, especially among the defenders of Bitcoin that trust the solidity of the mechanism PROOF-OF-WORK (POW) and in his history as a safe network since 2009.

Why would it be more expensive to attack Ethereum?

The main reason that Drake exposes to defend greater security in Ethereum It is the nature of the system PROOF-OF-STKE (POS). Unlike Pow in Bitcoin, where computational power is needed to validate blocks, in Pos It is necessary to possess and block a significant amount of the native token of the network: in this case, Eth.

At the moment, There are more than 34.1 million Eth In Staking, which is equivalent to a value close to USD $ 89.6 billion. To have the majority control of the network, an attacker should acquire more than 50% of the total in Staking, that is, at least USD $ 44,800 million in Eth.

In addition, market capitalization of Ethereum It exceeds USD $ 316,000 million, and their negotiation volume in 24 hours is around USD $ 25,000 million. A massive purchase attempt of Eth To attack the network it would not only be expensive, but would probably shoot the price of the asset, further increasing the cost of the attack.

Beyond the economic cost, Drake highlighted an exclusive advantage of the POS: The social reaction capacity to attacks.

As explained, in case of detecting an attempt to handle the network, the “Social layer” – that is, most users and developers who maintain the living network – can identify the attacker and apply sanctions such as the Slashing (Confiscation of the attacker’s staking funds). This mechanism is not available in Pow.

Matan Sitbon, founder of Lightblocks, A interoperability specialized firm Blockchain, reaffirmed this point: “Ethereum’s final security does not depend solely on cryptography or protocol rules, but on the economic and social coordination mechanisms of its community.”

Drake summarized it with forcefulness: “This is a POW superpower that is not available in Pow.”

And what about Bitcoin?

Despite warnings, some experts consider that, in practice, a 51% attack against Bitcoin It is still highly unlikely. Hassan Khan, CEO of the liquidity protocol Bitcoin Ordeezhe declared to Cointelegraph that “While it is theoretically possible, practical obstacles are very high.”

To control Bitcoin, A huge amount of computing and electricity power would be required, resources that even the nation states would have difficulty gathering without alerting the entire community.

Pavel Yashin, researcher at P2P.org, He added that if centralization is detected in any network, the community could organize a fork (bifurcation) to protect the ecosystem. In that case, the token of the committed chain would lose relevance and would be ruled out by the main actors in the market.

Conclusion: Technical Security vs. social security

Although economic estimates vary and the probability of a massive attack is still low, the debate between Pow and Pos It continues to be one of the central discussions in the evolution of cryptocurrencies.

While Bitcoin Trust its resistant infrastructure and history, Ethereum bets on community flexibility and governance as an additional line of defense. Both positions contribute to a more diverse ecosystem, but also reflect the philosophical differences that still divide the crypto sector.

Written article with the help of an AI content editor, edited by Angel Di Matteo / Diariobitcoin

Original image of Diariobitcoin, created with artificial intelligence, for free use, licensed under public domain

WARNING: Diariobitcoin offers informative and educational content on various topics, including cryptocurrencies, AI, technology and regulations. We do not provide financial advice. Cryptactive investments are high risk and may not be adequate for all. Investigate, consult an expert and verify the applicable legislation before investing. I could lose all its capital.

Subscribe to our newsletter