60 billion USD can destroy Bitcoin? Finance professor: The cost of a BTC "51% Attack" is not that high.

動區BlockTempo
BTC0,82%
ETH3,47%
BTG0,24%

A study by a finance professor at Duke University points out that the risk of a “51% Attack” facing Bitcoin is severely underestimated, with attackers needing only about $6 billion to destroy the Bitcoin network. This article is sourced from an article written by Wall Street Journal and organized, translated, and authored by Foresight News. (Background summary: El Salvador splits 6,285 Bitcoins into 14 wallets: to counter quantum attack threats) (Background supplement: In the face of quantum attacks, should Satoshi Nakamoto's 1.09 million Bitcoins be moved?) A finance professor at Duke University has published a paper warning that the threat of a “51% Attack” on Bitcoin is severely underestimated by the market. Attackers can achieve control over the Bitcoin network within a week by purchasing hardware worth $4.6 billion, investing $1.34 billion in building data centers, and incurring weekly electricity costs of about $130 million. Recent research shows that the threat of a “51% Attack” facing Bitcoin is severely underestimated, with attackers needing only about $6 billion to destroy Bitcoin. On October 9, Duke University finance professor Campbell Harvey warned in his latest research that although Bitcoin and gold are both seen as the darlings of “currency depreciation trades,” the risks facing Bitcoin far exceed those of gold. Attackers can achieve control over the Bitcoin network within a week by purchasing hardware worth $4.6 billion, investing $1.34 billion in building data centers, and incurring weekly electricity costs of about $130 million. Overnight, Bitcoin's rebound failed, plummeting about 3.3% from its daily high. By shorting Bitcoin through the derivation market, attackers can make huge profits when the price of Bitcoin crashes, enough to cover the attack costs. Harvey emphasizes: You can destroy Bitcoin's value with $6 billion. Although this kind of attack sounds overly technical, its credibility is very high. Matt Prusak, president of a U.S. Bitcoin company, believes that this concern is exaggerated, stating that accumulating and deploying mining equipment takes years, and shorting requires a huge collateral, with exchanges possibly suspending suspicious trading. 51% Attack: The Fundamental Threat to Bitcoin A 51% Attack refers to the situation where a single party controls more than half of the computing power of the blockchain network. Once successful, attackers can tamper with the ledger, forge transactions, and even perform a “double spend attack”—where the same digital token is reused. In contrast, gold does not have similar systemic risks. Furthermore, the current prosperity of the Bitcoin derivation market provides an economic incentive for a 51% Attack. Harvey's paper points out that traders can establish short positions with funds less than 10% of the average daily trading volume, generating huge profits that can cover the attack costs. This profit mechanism greatly enhances the economic feasibility of the attack, especially considering that the attack costs only account for 0.26% of the total value of the Bitcoin network, far lower than many investors' expectations. Harvey emphasizes: The low cost of attack is a serious issue for the future feasibility and security of Bitcoin. Harvey further points out that such attacks are likely to occur overseas, as many regions lack effective measures to prevent market manipulation. Industry Disagreement on Attack Risks Despite Harvey's serious warnings, there are differing views in the industry. Prusak believes that the economic feasibility is not sufficient to support the theory of a 51% Attack, noting that accumulating and deploying enough mining equipment takes years, which is not feasible in reality. Prusak also emphasizes that shorting Bitcoin requires huge collateral, and if exchanges suspect manipulation, they may suspend trading, preventing attackers from cashing in on their profits. Other blockchains have indeed suffered 51% attacks and survived. Bitcoin forked coin Bitcoin Gold and Ethereum Classic have both been attacked, but they are smaller blockchains with lower miner support, making them more susceptible to manipulation. Related Reports Trump: The U.S. successfully “attacked three Iranian nuclear facilities,” breaking a half-century red line, Bitcoin flash crashes to $100,866. MicroStrategy rebuts “Bitcoin quantum attack,” Michael Saylor: Worrying for nothing; if true, Google and Microsoft would fall first. Is PoS safer? Developers: The cost to attack Ethereum far exceeds Bitcoin's $10 billion (Can $6 billion destroy Bitcoin? Finance professor: The cost of BTC's “51% attack” is not that high). This article was first published in BlockTempo, the most influential blockchain news media.

View Original
Disclaimer: The information on this page may come from third parties and does not represent the views or opinions of Gate. The content displayed on this page is for reference only and does not constitute any financial, investment, or legal advice. Gate does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information and shall not be liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Virtual asset investments carry high risks and are subject to significant price volatility. You may lose all of your invested principal. Please fully understand the relevant risks and make prudent decisions based on your own financial situation and risk tolerance. For details, please refer to Disclaimer.

Related Articles

BTC short-term decline of 0.54%: Large volume of on-chain transfers and leveraged liquidations resonating to intensify selling pressure

On 2026-03-17 from 03:30 to 03:45 (UTC), BTC experienced a sharp decline with K-line data showing a yield of -0.54%, price range between 74350.0—74829.0 USDT, and amplitude reaching 0.64%. During this period, market attention increased and volatility intensified, with the short-term downward movement triggering widespread tracking. The main driver of this volatility was multiple large transfers exceeding 500 BTC each appearing on-chain, primarily flowing into a major exchange, causing the exchange's hot wallet balance to increase by approximately 3,200 BTC. This triggered concentrated selling pressure, prompting

GateNews12m ago

South Korea Police Agency Sets First-Ever Dark Coin Management Guidelines, Virtual Assets Compressed by Approximately 54.5 Billion Korean Won Over Past 5 Years

Korea's National Police Agency completes draft virtual asset management directive, first time including dark coin management and clarifying software wallet solutions. Over the past 5 years, virtual assets worth approximately 54.5 billion won have been seized, with police planning to select private custodian institutions. Experts recommend establishing a government-led custody system.

GateNews34m ago

BTC falls below 75000 USDT, intraday decline of 0.16%

Gate News reports that on March 17, Bitcoin fell below the 75,000 USDT level, currently trading at 74,994.01 USDT, with an intraday decline of 0.16%.

GateNews38m ago

Liquid Capital Founder Yi Lihua: Going All-In on Rebound, BTC Rebound to $85,000-$90,000 is a Reasonable Range

Liquid Capital founder Yi Lihua stated that he is preparing a new fund and adopting a full-position strategy to capitalize on rebounds, believing that BTC rebounding to $85,000 and $90,000 is reasonable. He shared his experience of over a decade in the crypto industry, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a positive mindset and conducting oneself with integrity.

GateNews57m ago

Slippage: The Most Underestimated Profit Killer in Trading

Author: CryptoPunk Many crypto traders have experienced the same disappointment: strategies that appear stable and profitable in backtests quickly see their returns shrink when actually deployed, sometimes turning from profit into loss. The issue is often not "misjudging the direction," but underestimating trading costs, especially slippage. In crypto markets where bull and bear phases switch more rapidly, volatility is more intense, and order books are more fragmented, slippage is not a trivial decimal point—it is the real threshold that determines whether a strategy can survive. A deviation of just 2 or 3 basis points can, in high-turnover strategies, completely wipe out the theoretical alpha. Based on long-term backtests of BTC/USDT and ETH/USDT, this article aims to answer a very practical question: to what extent does slippage erode strategy returns, and which strategies are most likely to be killed by slippage? 1. Introduction: Why Slippage

PANews1h ago
Comment
0/400
No comments