summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>2014-07-16 10:25:17 -0400
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2014-07-16 14:25:50 +0000
commit022b1782d27be38055c282a95d3cae72ba49c9df (patch)
treee33fe2d95c8a25b8bd1883b5edae5e8d6ced4b9a
parentf29a4c2a2ea09b7f2696dfa275023545eeb2f1ed (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-022b1782d27be38055c282a95d3cae72ba49c9df.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-022b1782d27be38055c282a95d3cae72ba49c9df.zip
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Draft BIP for geutxos message
-rw-r--r--fa/48b80263020e6aba1725d372899b2b5887b823125
1 files changed, 125 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/fa/48b80263020e6aba1725d372899b2b5887b823 b/fa/48b80263020e6aba1725d372899b2b5887b823
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..8feabd800
--- /dev/null
+++ b/fa/48b80263020e6aba1725d372899b2b5887b823
@@ -0,0 +1,125 @@
+Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
+ helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
+ by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
+ (envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1X7Q9W-0000ZB-FF
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:25:50 +0000
+Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
+ designates 209.85.212.173 as permitted sender)
+ client-ip=209.85.212.173; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
+ helo=mail-wi0-f173.google.com;
+Received: from mail-wi0-f173.google.com ([209.85.212.173])
+ by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
+ (Exim 4.76) id 1X7Q9V-00030F-B0
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:25:50 +0000
+Received: by mail-wi0-f173.google.com with SMTP id f8so5318119wiw.6
+ for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
+ Wed, 16 Jul 2014 07:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
+X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
+ d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
+ h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
+ :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
+ bh=D22R4sCSdZUbMeVMbhG1ttFtHxWxZglJrB/LBlnPXGg=;
+ b=Vn6jYHdk2AsXvqMgYtkE200nVx/GWhX9JiFhv8SIXJEM7P2wG38vhGHd8EuXa7sCYa
+ pC43BCRCr3SJu4HILd84FHipSDsShgt56QgJ7+buyaj5l+mmZje78sgHhCwNDYlCZLzR
+ Gu1rzW77S0Z5kln+j78LobtNMZbeYWCKwSJiUsSGIg3Jqh5mFgxwF7ynlO2MQyI5tH4L
+ 1v0snqiBEEVIKsFcXe8s4frKf3sPCn6nh56QnyId1EYnrEBZCdMExTvdlFVv1BHvpE1/
+ //bptvEVtjnZiI21VTQy1s/jVf0cxA3wNy1WYo7cGp1/q3Snl7qJBbKL42N9CrlW81/x
+ zGjg==
+X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkTbsjcQCHeltGTOl/oDRBWhNO9nqtgfmFykXf+/nOMslXD2RdWpZgb6kZHdO6i0bQy+djc
+X-Received: by 10.181.13.44 with SMTP id ev12mr14351644wid.57.1405520737754;
+ Wed, 16 Jul 2014 07:25:37 -0700 (PDT)
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Received: by 10.194.5.67 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Jul 2014 07:25:17 -0700 (PDT)
+In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP20E5R3D+Em4hordpSpe-e88iyHwyq=WdffsTCpTm+RVA@mail.gmail.com>
+References: <CANEZrP1t3Pz3FOgxkxsj+sSgyQhPxfUTdCGXTC7=yxeZkGt-DQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CAJHLa0NhZ=RuUMts19EUhY6C1+dy1yaje3Hb5Lfm+AqjRRL5uw@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CANEZrP20E5R3D+Em4hordpSpe-e88iyHwyq=WdffsTCpTm+RVA@mail.gmail.com>
+From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
+Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 10:25:17 -0400
+Message-ID: <CAJHLa0NcFcRhczf9WWGj+4fYBdYCUBb7Zm__Y5+qhprXL21wUA@mail.gmail.com>
+To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
+X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
+X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
+ See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
+ -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
+ sender-domain
+ -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
+ -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
+ author's domain
+ 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
+ not necessarily valid
+ -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
+X-Headers-End: 1X7Q9V-00030F-B0
+Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Draft BIP for geutxos message
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2014 14:25:50 -0000
+
+On the specific issue I raised, the BIP only says "Querying multiple
+nodes and combining their answers can be a partial solution to this"
+which is not very helpful advice. That's a partial answer to my
+question #2 with zero response for question #3.
+
+This sort of thing really needs a warning label like "use only if you
+don't have a trusted solution" and discussion of that choice is
+completely absent (question #1).
+
+
+On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 8:37 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
+> Thanks Jeff.
+>
+> I do feel like a lot of this is covered in the writeup I attached to the
+> implementation pull request, and I went over it again in the ensuing
+> discussion, and also in the BIP.
+>
+> The discussion of how to make it secure is covered in the "Upgrade" section
+> of the writeup and in the "Authentication" section of the BIP. Please do let
+> me know if these sections are missing something. The ideas discussed there
+> are not implemented in this pull request because outside of some special
+> cases, it is a very large project that involves a chain fork. You can see
+> the start of a solution here:
+>
+> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3977
+>
+>>
+>> If one implements your BIP in a naive manner -- simply find a node, and
+>> issue a single query -- they are dangerously exposed to malicious
+>> information. The BIP should describe this major security issue, and
+>> describe at least one method of solving it (ditto implementation, if
+>> lighthouse has not already solved this).
+>
+>
+> The BIP already does discuss this, in the authentication section.
+> Suggestions for how to make it better are welcome.
+>
+>>
+>> Comparison between this and BIP 35 (mempool command) are not apt, as
+>> miners and full nodes treat "mempool" returned data just like any other
+>> randomly solicited "tx" command on the network. Unlike "mempool" cmd, this
+>> "getutxos" cmd proffers post-verification trusted data.
+>
+>
+> I don't think it does proffer that, but if a part of the BIP could be read
+> as doing so, let me know which part and I'll fix it.
+
+
+
+--
+Jeff Garzik
+Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
+BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
+
+