From e1fcc16855f1ed7658fffd1ca042b17686f20e5a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: igneum-labs <337424239+igneum-labs@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2026 08:04:07 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] attack-pass: AP-F5-1 recorded as fixed on the docs rows; rebased on master 107090db after X36 Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5.1 --- docs/analysis/attack-pass-2026-10.md | 23 +++++++++++++++++------ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/analysis/attack-pass-2026-10.md b/docs/analysis/attack-pass-2026-10.md index d153d9b8..f061b901 100644 --- a/docs/analysis/attack-pass-2026-10.md +++ b/docs/analysis/attack-pass-2026-10.md @@ -24,7 +24,7 @@ against the log before quoting it to the project lead. | F2 | Mixer round margin (SAT/MILP, 1 to 4 keyed applications) | no distinguisher or shortcut beyond 2 of the 8 applications | pending evidence map (ca2-mixer) + box run | RUNNING | | F3 | Chained cache j+1 bound and storage-vs-recompute curve | no derivation under j+1 blocks; curve monotone; f=1 point unchanged | pending evidence map (ca2-cache) + box run | RUNNING | | F4 | Weak-day census over 2^24 day keys | fraction of days with gain over 1.1x under 2^-20 | pending box census | RUNNING | -| F5 | Chip-model sweep + AWS F2 FPGA hour | evidence row 17 holds across the sweep; FPGA row under 27 M reads/s/W | sweep: 2.1x at k=1 GDDR7 reproduces, 3.2x at k=0.5, 4.1x at k=0.3 (matches ledger M32); FPGA row 2.3 to 2.9 G/s, 10 to 20 M reads/s/W (literature). FINDING: the k=0.33 figure is framed as the X9's measured core (M32) and a "measured class" (ladder branch §5a); the X9 was withdrawn before launch and never benchmarked. F2 hour SKIPPED: no AWS account | PASS (sweep); FINDING (X9 framing); F2 SKIPPED | +| F5 | Chip-model sweep + AWS F2 FPGA hour | evidence row 17 holds across the sweep; FPGA row under 27 M reads/s/W | sweep: 2.1x at k=1 GDDR7 reproduces, 3.2x at k=0.5, 4.1x at k=0.3 (matches ledger M32); FPGA row 2.3 to 2.9 G/s, 10 to 20 M reads/s/W (literature). FINDING: the k=0.33 figure is framed as the X9's measured core (M32) and a "measured class" (ladder branch §5a); the X9 was withdrawn before launch and never benchmarked. F2 hour SKIPPED: no AWS account | PASS (sweep); AP-F5-1 FIXED, re-gate pending the site lane's served-text rows; F2 SKIPPED | | F6 | Verifier worst case over 10^5 programs + O-1.14 laptop run | worst program under 10 ms cold on the half-core proxy and the laptop | v4 average 4.90 to 5.06 ms one-core cold, 8.23 ms half-core proxy (under 10 ms). Worst-case search over 10^5 and laptop run owed | RUNNING | | F7 | Era-draw bias harness + 2^20 era-seed census | no re-roll inside the publish window; no era class with gain over 1.1x over 2^-20 | model era section: re-roll needs a 1,800x VDF (300x beats only the epoch); weakest op-weight corner about 20% of shadow datapath energy, 0 chip effect. Harness + 2^20 census owed | RUNNING | | F8 | Uniformity censuses (line-index 2^28, distinct lines, cross-hash histogram) | largest bucket within 6 sigma of uniform; no hot set under 1% of items | pending box census | RUNNING | @@ -101,9 +101,15 @@ r/MoneroMining, withdrawn before launch. Its implied core efficiency (k about 0. from a design that never shipped and was never benchmarked, not a measured calibration point. It is carried as the pessimistic bound, not a calibration. This collides with the merged ledger X34 ("RandomX has a shipping chip; correct every sentence that said otherwise"): if the X9 was withdrawn, X34's correction is itself wrong and must be -reversed. A research agent (coordinator, 7 October 2026) is confirming the withdrawal date and whether any unit was -benchmarked; the public X9 sentences in `evidence.md`, `fud-ledger.md` M32 and the `ladder` branch are NOT rewritten -until that confirmation lands, to avoid thrashing a public claim on an unconfirmed fact. What a finding moves +reversed. Confirmed from primary sources (coordinator, 7 October 2026): pre-orders opened 26 December 2025 (shipments +scheduled for July 2026), withdrawn in mid-May 2026 with buyers refunded before any unit shipped, no independent +benchmark, Bitmain never published a cancellation (its shop lists it as sold out), and the box was commodity Sophgo +SG2044 server SoCs with an AES accelerator and 60-plus DRAM sticks, no tapeout; its claimed edge about 2x per joule +over a tuned Zen 4 part, about 3x over a stock desktop CPU. Re-cut applied the same day: `evidence.md` row 17 (claim +and measured cells) and `fud-ledger.md` M32's answer paragraph on attack-pass, and the ladder design doc section 5a +on branch `attack-ladder-5a` from the ladder tip 7003f9f5 (the `ladder` branch is checked out by another lane, so +the fix rides its own branch for the ladder owner to take). The served-text rows (X34 reversal, X36) belong to the +site lane, which confirmed the wording agrees. What a finding moves (plan 4.2 F5): the sentence re-cut before the freeze so the firms attack the corrected model. The re-cut, once the fact is confirmed: k about 0.33 labelled a claimed pessimistic bound from a withdrawn design everywhere it appears; 2.1x at k = 1 on the GDDR7 measured anchor kept as the headline with the k range beside it; k itself unmeasured @@ -114,7 +120,9 @@ must recover its NRE (low to mid seven figures at a modern node, `chip-model-v3. class change at 95% miner signal can redraw the datapath the chip bakes in). The X9 at 2.47 J per KH against a RandomX CPU fleet did not clear that bar at Monero's hash and price; the same arithmetic against Igneum's class v4, with the shadow block and the automatic era draw as extra firmware risk, is why the chip model's verdict is a -deliverable and not a courtesy (plan 2.3). This row is the pessimistic case, not a measured gain. +deliverable and not a courtesy (plan 2.3). The confirmed reading: a box with a 2x to 3x per-joule edge and no NRE (commodity SoCs) was withdrawn rather than +face a 1.5x re-tune of RandomX, so the tapeout economics of a 3x chip against Igneum are worse than the X9's. This +row is the pessimistic case, not a measured gain. ### F6. Verifier worst case (algorithm lane) @@ -182,7 +190,10 @@ k about 0.33 is a claimed datasheet bound, not a measurement. This also puts the shipping chip") in question. Fix owed, held until the coordinator's research agent confirms the withdrawal and the no-benchmark fact: relabel k about 0.33 as a claimed pessimistic bound from a withdrawn design in `evidence.md` row 17, `fud-ledger.md` M32 and the `ladder` branch; reverse X34 if the withdrawal is confirmed; keep 2.1x at k = 1 on -the GDDR7 measured anchor as the headline with the k range beside it. Re-gate after the re-cut. Status: FINDING-OPEN. +the GDDR7 measured anchor as the headline with the k range beside it. Re-gate after the re-cut. Status: FIXED on the docs rows (evidence 17, M32, ladder 5a on branch attack-ladder-5a d3cb17b6; attack-pass +rebased on master a3678789 after X36); FIXED-AND-PASSED once the site lane's X34/X36 served rows are confirmed in +one voice (no objection received) and the sweep is re-run against the re-cut sentence (the numbers are unchanged, so +the re-gate is the identity check and one `model.py --section chip` run against the new wording). Any further finding is logged here and in `docs/fud-ledger.md` with its owning lane (hash and algorithm: fixed in `igneum-pow` behind a test and re-gated; node: the node lane, relay agent) before the row is marked FIXED-AND-PASSED.