How Does Increasing Confirmation Requirements Mitigate Risk?

By increasing the required number of block confirmations for a deposit to be credited, the exchange forces a potential attacker to extend their malicious chain significantly longer than the honest chain. For a double-spend attack to succeed, the attacker would need to maintain 51% control and re-mine many blocks, which becomes exponentially harder with each confirmation.

This increases the cost and time of the attack, making it economically unfeasible.

How Do Centralized Exchanges Prevent Double-Spending before Blockchain Confirmation?
How Does a Higher Confirmation Requirement Mitigate a Double-Spending Attack?
What Is the ‘Longest Chain Rule’ in Blockchain Consensus?
How Does a Transaction’s Confirmation Status Relate to Double-Spending Risk?
What Is ‘Double-Spending’ and Why Is It the Main Concern of a 51% Attack?
What Is Double-Spending and Why Is a 51% Attack Necessary to Execute It?
Why Is Transaction Confirmation Important to Prevent Double-Spending?
How Does Transaction Finality Relate to the Risk of Double-Spending?

Glossar