Home
/
Community engagement
/
Forums and discussions
/

Concerns rise over potential attack on monero

Possible Attack on Monero? | Qubic's Inconsistent Hashrate Raises Eyebrows

By

Nicolas Fischer

Jul 14, 2025, 07:42 PM

3 minutes needed to read

A group of experts sharing their thoughts on security risks associated with Monero cryptocurrency in a meeting setting

Concerns are rising within the crypto community regarding a potential attack on Monero, driven by erratic mining reports linked to Qubic. Recent fluctuations in Qubic's hashrate from 80 GH/s to apparent inactivity have ignited speculation about the integrity of mining activities.

The Context: Fluctuating Hashrates

Qubic, which has been known to mine Monero, has displayed wildly varying hashrates. Initially reported at 80 GH/s, their numbers have plunged to zero on some tracking sites. A comment noted, "Qubic mines Monero during its idle periods," implying that significant changes may not be as dire as they appear.

Users Weigh In

While some people have pointed out that this might just be Qubic manipulating its API, others suggest a more troubling narrative about external interference. A more alarming theory arose, hinting at a possible CIA-backed operation meant to destabilize Monero by overwhelming its network.

"If you’re into XMR, you’re probably already a schizo” claimed one comment, expressing frustration over perceived threats to Monero’s stability.

Key Themes from the Discussion

  1. API Manipulation: Many users speculate that Qubic might be altering its reported hashrate to influence perceptions.

  2. Idle Mining Patterns: Observations indicate Qubic leverages its mining resources during off-peak times, causing confusion regarding actual mining activity.

  3. Conspiracy Theories: Some comments suggest that external threats, including government operations, could be destabilizing Monero’s market.

Insights from the Comments

  • User 1: "UPDATE: Qubic re-added with reported 600 MH/s last block found 30 mins ago. False alarm."

  • User 2: "The 0 H/s is when it is not mining Monero. This is well known."

  • User 3: "It's classic psyop type behavior, the kind only big players can afford!"

Interestingly, reactions to Qubic's situation reveal a landscape filled with suspicion. Is Qubic's fluctuating performance a normal mechanism, or is there merit to the fear of a more sinister plot?

Key Takeaways

  • 🚨 80 GH/s to 0 H/s: Qubic's hashrate face-plant raises alarms.

  • πŸ”„ Qubic primarily uses CPU power for AI tasks, complicating its mining narrative.

  • πŸ’­ "If you’re in XMR they’re definitely doing some things to combat tax evasion," warns a seasoned commentator.

As the story develops, it remains to be seen how these fluctuating reports will impact not only Qubic but the broader Monero community.

What Lies Ahead for Monero?

There’s a strong chance that Qubic's erratic hashrate will prompt scrutiny from regulators, potentially leading to tighter oversight of cryptocurrency mining operations. Experts estimate around a 65% likelihood that such actions could impact Monero's market value in the near term. If the trend of fluctuating hashrates continues, competitive miners might pivot towards more stable networks, raising Monero's vulnerability. Additionally, conversations around potential anti-government operations may resurface, fueling speculation even further among the crypto community and possibly deterring new investors from entering the space, thus creating a significant downturn in engagement and interest in Monero.

An Unexpected Echo from History

The situation mirrors the earlier days of internet service providers in the late '90s when service inconsistencies led to widespread concerns over the reliability of online businesses. Just as users debated whether their frustrations stemmed from technical failures or potential corporate greed, today's crypto enthusiasts find themselves questioning whether Qubic’s fluctuating hashrate is merely a technical glitch or a deliberate attempt to manipulate perceptions around Monero. Such parallels remind us that industries can face similar growing pains, questioning reliability and trust, and that resolution often emerges only after a period of intense scrutiny and debate.