** Create a double expendit
Ethereum, like all other blockchain networks, was built on the top of cryptographic techniques aimed at preventing attacks, such as dual consumption. However, a particular threat can potentially use the safety of these mechanisms.
In bitcoin, preliminary attack is a type of attack in which the attacker finds a certain entrance (preimiga) that produces a certain output hash (y). To avoid this, the Bitcoin network uses a cryptographic hash function called SHA-246 to create a hash. The challenge is to find two different entrances, x iy sohash (x) == hash (y).
There is a similar issue in the Ethereum mechanism of the consensus on the justification of the tree on the tree. When creating a new transaction (TX), the hash must be in a way that ensures its uniqueness and prevents attacks such as double consumption.
TX replacement in TX Merkle Stab: Double Consumption -Commation
The question raised on Crypto.se emphasizes the potential risk of replacing one block (or transaction) in the Merkle tree. This can create a potentially dual consumption attack, where the attacker creates two separate transactions, all of which use the same input and output extracts.
This is how it can work:
- The attacker finds the “TX” existing transaction on the Ethereum network.
۲.
۳
- The second user wants to spend “U, ether (
eth) from `tx ‘.
Because both transactions use the same entry and output hash, the second transaction is considered a valid network validation process. As a result: “I will receive two separate ETH awards to the ether’s release.
Why does this threat exist
In Ethereum, each block is associated with a unique hash (“the root of the Merkle”) to its predecessor. Merkle Tree enables developers to create a cumulative justification for ownership by riding consecutive transactions. However, when the striker replaces the transaction in the Merkle tree, you can potentially create a new branch that is separated from the original block.
If this replacement transaction is consumed, the network will confirm as valid as both the input and output extract correspond to the hash of the original transactions. This creates a double edition scenario where they received two users for double ether release.
To alleviate the threat
Although it can be a significant risk to Ethereum security, this double cost is theoretically possible, but it is difficult to perform them without the progress of the blockchain cryptography and mechanics.
To alleviate this risk, the development group behind Ethereum took several measures:
- Merkle wood structure : Merkle wood ensures that each block is connected to its predecessor via a unique hash.
- ** Labor Consensus on the evidence of work.
- Consensus Algorithm
: The Ethereum Algorithm Consensus includes solving complex mathematical equations, which makes the attacker impracticable from a calculation point of view to replace the block without detecting.
In summary, although it is theoretically possible to create a dual -term attack, the theoretical threat remains due to the strong security measures taken by Tim Ethereum.
