Please don’t skip this message — it only takes a minutes to read. Sorry to bother you, but time is running out.

Bitcoin is freedom. If you think independent, ‘bitcoin-only’ media is important, if you believe information and education about bitcoin matters for adoption, and if you have gained something from our work, we would be grateful if you could chip in $21. 

Join the 2% of our readers who occasionally make a donation. If everyone reading this donated just $21, we would reach our target in a couple of hours. $21 is all we ask for. To cover the cost for our servers, editors, writers, and thumbnail artists we rely on our readers’ generous support. 

How You can chip in:

  • Send sats as a tip to a writer. All of our writers have an active tipping widget.
  • Join our campaign on 
    Awesome perks are waiting for you such as the limited edition Bukele Blend Coffee from El Salvador.

Your support ensures that Bitcoin News stays independent with a laser focus on Bitcoin and only Bitcoin.


EOS Block Producers Freeze User Accounts, Prompting Anti-Centralization Outcry

EOS Block Producers Freeze User Accounts, Prompting Anti-Centralization Outcry

Support free writers: > send a tip

written by

EOS block producers have frozen seven accounts in response to concerns from users that their wallets had been compromised due to phishing attacks. This has caused some controversy, likening EOS to centralized banks that freeze money at will. Some commentators believe this defeats the primary goal of cryptocurrency: to function as decentralized money that no centralized organization controls.

There has been a heavy backlash on social media following the block producer’s decision, and price dropped several percentage points when this story broke, shaving USD 300 million off the EOS market cap.

EOS recently migrated from the Ethereum blockchain to its own native blockchain, a process that ended up being slower and more difficult than expected. Concern over the centralization of EOS during the transition period, since full control of the network was handed over to a single block producer, caused a 30% price crash. Eventually, EOS went live after 15% of total EOS was staked in a vote, and dozens of block producers began to run the blockchain.

The migration resulted in a major opportunity for phishing scams, which is where the current problem stems from. It was a confusing and complex process for users to transfer their tokens to the EOS MainNet and vote for block producers, and many websites sprung up to help make the process easy. Voting requires the private key, and some of these websites ended up being fake and stole private keys.

A service called EOS 911 was created to report incidents of private key phishing. The block producers decided to protect users who had reported phishing by freezing their accounts indefinitely. The EOSIO Core Arbitration Forum (ECAF) is supposed to be in charge of such decisions, but it isn’t fully set up yet and decided not to rule. The block producers unanimously decided to take action despite this to protect users from losing their coins.

Regardless of the good intent behind the freezing of the accounts, the main concern is that block producers have this power at all. Effectively, EOS appears to exercise power just as a centralized bank would.

Perhaps even worse than freezing accounts, professor Emin Gun Sirer from Cornell University says EOS block producers can reverse transactions. If true, this means EOS transactions are never final, which could result in serious losses for merchants and exchanges down the road depending on block producer’s decision making.

Cryptocurrency generally has intrinsic value in its unique aspects of decentralization and irreversible payments. EOS appears to have eliminated these positive characteristics and has put control over user money into the hands of a small group of block producers.

Theoretically, block producers must act unanimously for accounts to be frozen or transactions reversed, and for the time being all 54 active block producers have been working together in a centralized fashion via conference calls. However, it is possible in the future that block producers will fall into disagreement and stop working with each other like this, which would help increase decentralization.

That being said, block producers are determined via voting which is directly tied to wealth. Someone with enough money could vote for themselves and take over EOS block production and then proceed to steal coins, attack other users without reason, or even go as far as destroying the entire network. The idea of having block producers who can easily modify transactions might be the fatal flaw that negates all the other positive aspects of the EOS platform.


Follow on Twitter at

Telegram Alerts from at

Help spread this article :) is NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE

Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of

For informational purposes only. Individuals and entities should not construe any information on this site as investment, financial, legal, tax, accounting or other advice. Information provided does not constitute a recommendation or endorsement by to buy or sell bitcoin, cryptocurrencies or other financial instruments. Forecasts are inherently limited and cannot be relied upon. Do your own research and consult a professional advisor. The opinion of authors do not reflect those of 


bitcoin shop miami

Read More Bitcoin News

Hayek And Bitcoin

Hayek and Bitcoin

Hayek passed long before Bitcoin’s inception, but in his book The Denationalisation of Money, he argued for nothing short of stripping the state of its monopoly power of money itself.

Read More »


bitcoin shop miami

Join our Newsletter

Video of the Week


Latest on Bitcoin News

Join our Newsletter