user78451: One of the arguments made in favor of relying on ASIC mining hardware to secure the Bitcoin blockchain is that commodity hardware is more prone to a 51% attack since an attacker could easily infect millions of computers through a malware attack and use the computer's resources to execute a 51% attack against the network.

It's very hard to.. hack into someone's SHA256d ASICs

Are ASICs really resistant to malware attacks? If so, why?

user63872: Resistance to malware really just comes down to the security practices of the hardware's operator.
Simply put, we might expect that the admin of a mining farm would be quite vigilant in terms of security, compared to your average person with a PC at home. Thus, we could expect that it is easier to infect and control the average PC, compared to a mining farm.

user208: I think you're misinterpreting the argument.
It is this: in an ASIC-mining ecosystem, where mining with commodity hardware is ridiculously unprofitable, there is little incentive for attackers to go infect non-miner's computers with mining code. This is about the millions of end-user PCs on the internet that are under control of botnets. If it was remotely profitable, people would pay botnet operators to let the victim computers do mining for them. In an ASIC-dominated world this is just too unprofitable to bother with.
It isn't about infecting ASICs, or conversely about infecting computers of actual CPU miners (in a world where all mining is done using generic purpose CPUs). People who want to participate in mining intentionally as a form of income would notice if their system was infected regardless, as they'd see their income fall.
Of course, at the same time, it is probably true that infecting ASIC-based infrastructure is harder, as ASICs tend to come in pre-packaged devices with their own embedded controller that does the network/pool interaction, rather than on end user's home systems. I think this is a distraction from the point though, because if CPU mining had continued and risen to the level of professional effort that ASIC mining is now, solutions to this would have been found to it.

78451: <p>One of the arguments made <a href="https://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/92329/78451">in favor of relying on ASIC mining hardware</a> to secure the Bitcoin blockchain is that commodity hardware is more prone to a 51% attack since an attacker could easily infect millions of computers through a malware attack and use the computer's resources to execute a 51% attack against the network.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It's very hard to.. hack into someone's SHA256d ASICs</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Are ASICs really resistant to malware attacks? If so, why?</p>
 63872: <p>Resistance to malware really just comes down to the security practices of the hardware's operator.</p>
<p>Simply put, we might expect that the admin of a mining farm would be quite vigilant in terms of security, compared to your average person with a PC at home. Thus, we could expect that it is easier to infect and control the average PC, compared to a mining farm.</p>
 208: <p>I think you're misinterpreting the argument.</p>
<p>It is this: in an ASIC-mining ecosystem, where mining with commodity hardware is ridiculously unprofitable, there is little incentive for attackers to go infect <strong>non-miner's computers</strong> with mining code. This is about the millions of end-user PCs on the internet that are under control of botnets. If it was remotely profitable, people would pay botnet operators to let the victim computers do mining for them. In an ASIC-dominated world this is just too unprofitable to bother with.</p>
<p>It isn't about infecting ASICs, or conversely about infecting computers of actual CPU miners (in a world where all mining is done using generic purpose CPUs). People who want to participate in mining intentionally as a form of income would notice if their system was infected regardless, as they'd see their income fall.</p>
<p>Of course, at the same time, it is probably true that infecting ASIC-based infrastructure is harder, as ASICs tend to come in pre-packaged devices with their own embedded controller that does the network/pool interaction, rather than on end user's home systems. I think this is a distraction from the point though, because if CPU mining had continued and risen to the level of professional effort that ASIC mining is now, solutions to this would have been found to it.</p>
