More details are starting to emerge about the recent dusting attack on litecoin that occurred earlier this month and more specifically, about the extent of the damage done by the attack. Some initial information was given courtesy of the Binance Academy and now, more data has been tweeted by Glassnode, a blockchain data and metrics firm on August 15, 2019, which revealed that the dusting attack on litecoin affected 290,582 addresses.
The previous information by Binance Academy stated that upwards of 50 accounts were affected and according to the analysis, there is an indication that a similar scale attack took place in April 2019. There was also a tweet from Binance which linked to a transaction that was allegedly part of the attack in which a fraction of a coin was sent to 50 addresses.
The Aftermath of the Attack
James Jager, who is the project Lead at Binance Academy and was also the first person to identify the attack, spoke with CoinTelegraph when he stated that the attack was network-wide and affected everyone within the ecosystem.
“It was network-wide, which meant it affected all users of litecoin that had an active litecoin address at the time. The address of the person responsible for the dusting attack can be found here: https://blockchair.com/litecoin/address/LeEMCDHmvDb2MjhVHGphYmoGeGFvdTuk2K,” he said.
He also stated that the attack, despite initial belief, was not a malicious one but instead was done accidentally by a person who runs a mining pool within Russia and simply wanted to advertise his business to litecoin uses.
“The person behind the dusting attack owns a mining pool based out of Russia, EMCD[dot]io. They reached out to express that their intent was to advertise their mining pool to the users of Litecoin, however, it’s unclear from our perspective or anyone else’s as to whether there were alternative motives,” he said.
It was also stated by Jan Happel, who is the co-founder of Glassnode that the term ‘dusting attack’ is a broad term and the intent behind the attacks are not uniform across the board and so it is possible that the attack was truly unintentional. This brings another angle to the wide variety of attacks that take place across blockchain emphasize on the fact that not all are malicious.