A Single Entity is Controlling Six EOS Block Producers says EOS New York


In a series of tweets, EOS New York published data reveals that six registered block producers (BPs) on the networks are being managed by a single entity.

28 November 2019 | AtoZMarketsEOS New York, a block producer of EOS has put forward a worrying discovery about the network. It seems not all block producers are independent, and some of the positions are controlled by a central entity.

Duplicate block producers of EOS exposed

EOS New York has discovered that six of the current block producers are linked to a single entity, potentially taking away nearly a third of the network block production power. Rewards and computational resources are also more centralized than expected.

Based on URL ownership, EOS New York discovered the domains for six block producers were purchased by a single email account. Additionally, the block producer has requested the signatures of the top 50 block producers on the EOS network. This is an attempt to try to identify if any more groups of them are owned by the same people.

EOS New York now wants the removal of all six registered producers.

“We are therefore proposing the removal of the following registered producers: stargalaxybp, validatoreos, eoszeusiobp1, eosunioniobp, eosathenabp1, and eosrainbowbp,” one of the subsequent tweets by EOS New York stated.

Block Producers and DPOS

The EOS blockchain uses the Delegated-Proof-of-Stake (DPOS) consensus algorithm. This means that who owns more tokens, also has more voting rights. Although normal users, unlike the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) protocol, can not produce blocks, they can choose EOS block producers. One may feel reminded of a stock corporation: Those who hold a larger stake in the company normally also have more voting rights. Decentralization looks different.

However, what is added in the current case – and does not make the whole thing decentralized – is the exposure of the individual entities and the demand for exile from the network. The EOS New York delegation demonstrates its supremacy by calling for the exclusion of individual network participants seeking to leverage the incentive system in the EOS network. Again: decentralization looks different.

The EOS community has responded

Responding to EOS New York’s tweet, Twitter user James Mart argued that approaching the problem manually and forensically is mere “whack-a-mole,” demanding time and at best offering a “temporary fix.” He advocated reforms to governance and voting mechanisms instead:

“1T1DV and stake-time weighted voting via Dan’s stake pools needs to be our top priority right now. It will permanently solve this issue.”

Nevertheless, Mart’s response was challenged by crypto trader Justin Buck, who located the problem in the consensus mechanism itself:

“DPOS is not BFT [Byzantine Fault Tolerant]. Let’s be upfront and honest about it.”

What do you think about the EOS block producers? Share your thoughts in the comments section below!

    Share Your Opinion, Write a Comment