newtoopensuse
commented
6 years ago Since nobody has answered this post, I’ll do. Why did it take you so much time and effort?
For me I compared the number of shares submitted by divert with that in claymore’s log. During the same period the log reports devfee found 1 share while nanopool reports 2 to 4 (the highest).
Let the numbers talk for themselves.
Just to note, I've already posted a more detailed an lengthy version of this in my mining thread over on ArsTechnica. (see: https://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?p=35151933#p35151933) Though I've cleaned all the other topics of discussion away and C/V'd what's left specifically for this community here.
...
The methodology here was pretty simple, test the various modes of Claymore's newest dual mining program (v11.6) and see if there was any of them that lacked the SSL developer connections integrated a couple versions back. This was funny enough put into the program right after a bunch of us reported success with rerouting his wallet addresses. One could speculate from this timing of events he watches the internet for anyone working a bit too hard on taking his earnings. Anyways, the encrypted protocol was first supported by Ethermine.org ...and testing there clearly shows you're not going to redirect the dev fee anywhere. Though testing the ETH-Proxy mode (ESM 0) seemed a logical step because I could run Claymore's Eth-Proxy integration right up against the official opensource EthMiner client when ran in combination with Atrides Eth-Proxy for DwarfPool. I could compare free software vs. fee software then if I found things still worth going forward I could hopefully test the fee and make sure it was honest.
Here's where I found something really interesting, given this mode is written directly for RPCv2 pools using asynchronous networking (aka: DwarfPool), the client won't connect out via an encrypted port/pool as DwarfPool doesn't currently support SSL. It won't relaunch the miner in a new mode just for the dev cycle as that would be a huge waste of time & shares. So what does it do? It calls out to loads of DwarfPool servers on tons of different wallet addresses and just accepts it's fate as unprotected data. This is really cool because now we can get the Divert program to intercept it's data, so finally we can log dev cycles, shares, all of the goodness without triggering his security system. The latest release notes & Readme!!!.txt file found inside the Claymore V11.6 package say "This miner is free-to-use, however, current developer fee is 1% for Ethereum-only mining mode (-mode 1) and 1.5% for dual mining mode (-mode 0)..." then goes on to defend his fees / antihacking measures.
So let's look at some pics of the process so everybody can come along for the ride. Here's a screenshot of Divert 3.6 working so you can all see it in greater detail. As expected, down to the second, every hour it calls to authorize a change in the Ethereum login & start working towards a different account. What we see Divert doing is grabbing these new account credentials and redirecting the process back to the primary account by literally swapping them. So it just relogs into your own account, gives the thumbs up everything is great, and keeps on working until it's time to swap out of the dev cycle and back into the normal work cycle. Now let's have a look at this occurring as detected by DwarfPool's side of things instead of my side of things. Here you can clearly see it waiting to login once an hour for both the clients used in the test runs. The machines where started shortly after each other so there's a bit of a delay between one logging into the dev cycle and the other logging into the dev cycle.
Though clearly we can see Divert working and the shares being rerouted back to the same account. If you want to actually see the history of shares via DwarfPool's account graphs over the time period of the testing then, here it is as well! I like this image because you can see the various stages things went through including my own faults in testing which caused me to restart them completely, twice. First you can see the official open source combo ran, next you can see legitimate Claymore operation paying forward all the dev fees, then after two unexpected downtimes, you can finally see testing Claymore's dev fees via Divert 3.6. You can also see where I was attempting to test this during the unexpected downtime hours because the developer cycle was still consistently logging into the account and submitting valid shares. What's all this time spent leave us with for results? Check for yourself, here's what I ended up with!
Claymore's Dual Ethereum v11.6 Miner + NoDevFee Divert v3.6 Trial Results
2.01%! That's not at all what he claims he's taking for a developer fee. Actually, that's another third on top of what he claims he's taking for the price of dual mining. Taking more then the stated dev fee is a bit of a dark spot for me, doesn't really come off very GoodGuyGreg that's for sure. Makes me happy there's folks out there double checking things and even making the tools to do so in the first place. If you're willing to believe that he's just made a mistake in his program's dev cycle or that maybe I've botched my test results then that's certainly possible. I've not ran ten passes of each test then compared results, this is just the first fully completed without interruption results I've gathered so far on the new v11.6 release. Though it's certainly food for thought and look at those numbers, they worked out to be exactly 2.01% over the previous test. I'll let you all decide how you feel about that as I'm sure opinions differ. Anyway, here's to a new version dropping after this post goes live. LOL!
'Goblin