A sudden rise in transaction cost on the ethereum classic blockchain created a fear in the minds of a few developers who are forced to estimate that cryptocurrency exchanges could be in danger of attack. This doubt is natural considering a last week’s attack which caused a loss of more than $200,000 from minimum one exchange.
Within a mere 24 hours, regular transaction costs on the Ethereum blockchain went up to $6.10, more than almost 800 percent from its previous day’s cost of $0.71. It was undoubtedly the most significant spike in transaction costs in the history of the blockchain.
All things considered, ethereum classic miners made as much as 844 ETC (or generally $3,600), an abnormal event for the system that keeps on running prime programming instance of the ethereum project.
However, the uptick is one of the proofs which are making developers believe that this rise might be a sign that an attacker is utilizing known ways to attack certain cryptocurrency exchanges. At the beginning of the market, one user on the ethereum classic channel recorded a doubling rise in the hash power.
Another information source said ethereum classic mining pool named 2miners represented most of the extra hash rate hitting up to 3,054.29 GH/s. Even though nobody can distinguish who precisely is sending transactions with such high charges, there is theory over this thought processes.
The sender of these transactions is hoping to exploit a loophole that encourages gas token creation through exchanges free of any charges.
GasToken is an application made to enable users to store and sale “gas.” It was introduced last year. This token has proved itself useful those who want to save money on costs by encouraging them to tokenize gas and store it when organize charges are low or move them when costs are high.
An explicit found by Level K last October showed that digital money exchanges which don’t put a limit on gas use might end up with a loss in assets if attackers mine new gas tokens.
An exploit was revealed months back in which the exchanges were paying gas for the withdrawal. Anonymous users were making use of this to pull back and mint gas tokens without any charges, by merely having the exchanges pay a lot of gas.