Quote from: adhitthana on October 28, 2014, 12:26:12 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on October 28, 2014, 12:21:56 AM

Quote from: adhitthana on October 28, 2014, 12:16:44 AM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on October 27, 2014, 11:53:51 PM

Quote from: adhitthana on October 27, 2014, 11:40:58 PM

I expect that preventing a 51% style attack on any alt coin used will be necessary?
So that would mean that any coin used in the sidechain would have to be a coin that is potential competition for BTC too?

51% attacks only affect blockchains, not assets/"coins".

Ok so lest say "donkeycoin's" blockchain was being used, and there was a 51% attack on "donkeycoin". What are the possible implications?

You mean a 51% attack on donkeycoin's blockchain?

Yes, what else could it mean? Tongue

For some reason, some people seem to have the misconception that a 51% attack is holding 51% of bitcoins.

Quote from: adhitthana on October 28, 2014, 12:26:12 AM

Quote

Then assets within donkeycoin's blockchain are susceptible to reversal and/or oversight/control by the 51% attacker.
If the attacker achieves 66% (or whatever the configurable threshold is for the sidechain), then they can also begin to steal outside assets pegged into that blockchain.
The donkeycoin asset/coin itself is irrelevant to this, and may or may not exist.

So that could mean BTC could conceivably be stolen, as BTC could be pegged in the "Donkeycoin" blockchain?

Conceivably, but the Donkey-blockchain must have been created with a higher-than-50% limit on what an attacker would need to steal.
It's a tradeoff against censorship risk: So, in one example, the attacker might need 90% to steal, but then he only needs 10% to censor return transactions.