diff options
| author | Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com> | 2016-12-15 17:44:55 -0500 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2016-12-15 22:45:39 +0000 |
| commit | 0a40605e177693af9cd21f4c0dde122f2b33a647 (patch) | |
| tree | 48a4a33fe8330113c6803d75093a5c8c50e53d06 | |
| parent | a1b36765b53657973ad86f15a3f2a4c38f997807 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-0a40605e177693af9cd21f4c0dde122f2b33a647.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-0a40605e177693af9cd21f4c0dde122f2b33a647.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Planned Obsolescence
| -rw-r--r-- | 74/2cfb4e615448fa2f8a26b3a9a4b36bd9869277 | 147 |
1 files changed, 147 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/74/2cfb4e615448fa2f8a26b3a9a4b36bd9869277 b/74/2cfb4e615448fa2f8a26b3a9a4b36bd9869277 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..a7c9983a8 --- /dev/null +++ b/74/2cfb4e615448fa2f8a26b3a9a4b36bd9869277 @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +Return-Path: <eth3rs@gmail.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2DD3BAA + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 15 Dec 2016 22:45:39 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-ua0-f193.google.com (mail-ua0-f193.google.com + [209.85.217.193]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DBA3119D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 15 Dec 2016 22:45:36 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by mail-ua0-f193.google.com with SMTP id 20so2441491uak.0 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:45:36 -0800 (PST) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; + h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to + :cc:content-transfer-encoding; + bh=os/KsL62F2QaSrXoiFyayiFLcK0HyG8MtO5od8nUrJ8=; + b=tXL7sJJu+3h9D/+aBp94MnCpyedFsrUTEhsxvf4fQDf3YrMs951UDmHt1KkfgbJFp8 + GlsNPO57eKA9FS9wuuE6MlacexSe25gY4keCbi9z0ATaFTy1gWee1KsSJFoTmS7U7iO1 + 0A7aYfdX/gJAWs0u+FUwpRWeZ3BfH9kIZ1vknOhjeLLKeNccSAD5mgdPZPPX3bFsMfqs + YQDPTM3ZDirhyFXRuFuI3Ig4CWJF05Ba8b71pICQDDVg/O2QvB2MPAHFS8grAtqGrU7j + vMWJ+kHaizs0o+TqHtngFYinfzQYPbk1FEuk+KTUaYWKAqJEXb7IBU2AXFJChd0gz04s + 4iLg== +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20161025; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date + :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; + bh=os/KsL62F2QaSrXoiFyayiFLcK0HyG8MtO5od8nUrJ8=; + b=qNg77Pj0CXFYLcgDY8RRRT4u970DyWQmh5RF+1ZaoPIoPNGJ6nZPcTEGk95Uf2Y5iU + zna/iaF/IJn/fapzEpWx5iy/rcucJVHaWhLNeoNwRuq+cNdZt00Ajmr3nAXu/ndzBEso + Z9YX5dVq/RoFPYQityGXvI/VBxw38WepOetnIIvPq2faK7aHCQs192mXFnyHjnSzhI9e + T37yOk2yt2lthGWc/vhFRl91ndqz9+1GjUo2nFq2DfX3sSnf9UaemUKDT3ZXO2htOK+C + cT0ONFKlvQUMi2FycolfMnDK41CwONOuAX2hHBLoDZG5YBVfeAdGy4xyofP6vRCUpdyi + gHYA== +X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC00N7aQOojQ940VHQ5YYparJT/jQf5nUx3R95+IiZPXDdN6tQkLmlk8f48Ubh0cgX1rKIL7mxlRwQS/pPQ== +X-Received: by 10.176.68.68 with SMTP id m62mr4538740uam.65.1481841936029; + Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:45:36 -0800 (PST) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Received: by 10.176.6.66 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Dec 2016 14:44:55 -0800 (PST) +In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDo8DR9M9qKqhGfnRHNVrMVFGqsC-gJy4xtxT9=CQOBhgw@mail.gmail.com> +References: <f27bd300c20d1b48cddc7e1d1dc1a96c@112bit.com> + <615c88d2a1263810923705c170b25d33@112bit.com> + <CABm2gDo8DR9M9qKqhGfnRHNVrMVFGqsC-gJy4xtxT9=CQOBhgw@mail.gmail.com> +From: Ethan Heilman <eth3rs@gmail.com> +Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 17:44:55 -0500 +Message-ID: <CAEM=y+Ws-2_mpZQfE1BD8dnmkcBFsXK8Pd3ZvX=e9R_4bj4qng@mail.gmail.com> +To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>, + Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 22:48:22 +0000 +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Planned Obsolescence +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 22:45:39 -0000 + +I assume this has been well discussed in at some point in the Bitcoin +community, so I apologize if I'm repeating old ideas. + +Problem exploitable nodes: +It is plausible that people running these versions of bitcoind may not +be applying patches. Thus, these nodes may be vulnerable to known +exploits. I would hope none of these nodes are gateway nodes for +miners, web wallets or exchanges. How difficult would it be to crawl +the network to find vulnerable nodes and exploit them? What percentage +of the network is running vulnerable versions of bitcoind? + +Problem eclipsable nodes: +Currently a bitcoind node disconnects from any node with a version +below MIN_PEER_PROTO_VERSION. Such nodes become be ripe for an eclipse +attack because they are partitioned from the newer nodes, especially +when they are "freshly obsolete". I have not examined how protocol +versioning works in detail so I could be missing something. + +One option could be that after a grace period: +1. to still connect to obsolete nodes and even to transmit blockheaders, +2. but to stop sending the full-blocks and transactions to these +nodes, thereby alerting the operator that something is wrong and +causing them to upgrade. +It may make sense to create this as a rule, if your longest chain +consists of only blockheaders and no one will tell you the +transactions for over 1000 blocks you are obsolete, spit out an error +message and shutdown. + +This would not address the issue of alt-coins which are forked from +old vulnerable versions of bitcoind, but that is probably out of +scope. + +On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n via bitcoin-dev +<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: +> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 4:38 AM, Juan Garavaglia via bitcoin-dev +> <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: +>> Older node versions may generate issues because some upgrades will make +>> several of the nodes running older protocol versions obsolete and or +>> incompatible. There may be other hard to predict behaviors on older vers= +ions +>> of the client. +> +> Hard to predict or not, you can't force people to run newer software. +> +>> In order to avoid such wide fragmentation of "Bitcoin Core=E2=80=9D node= + versions +>> and to help there be a more predictable protocol improvement process, I +>> consider it worth it to analyze introducing some planned obsolescence in +>> each new version. In the last year we had 4 new versions so if each vers= +ion +>> is valid for about 1 year (52560 blocks) this may be a reasonable time f= +rame +>> for node operators to upgrade. If a node does not upgrade it will stop +>> working instead of participating in the network with an outdated protoco= +l +>> version. +> +> When you introduce anti-features like this in free software they can +> be trivially removed and they likely will. +> +>> These changes may also simplify the developer's jobs in some cases by +>> avoiding them having to deal with ancient versions of the client. +> +> There's a simpler solution for this which is what is being done now: +> stop maintaining and giving support for older versions. +> There's limited resources and developers are rarely interested in +> fixing bugs for very old versions. Users shouldn't expect things to be +> backported to old versions (if developers do it and there's enough +> testing, there's no reason not to do more releases of old versions, it +> is just rarely the case). +> _______________________________________________ +> bitcoin-dev mailing list +> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev + |