summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorPeter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>2015-06-19 10:08:15 -0400
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2015-06-19 14:08:33 +0000
commit2d97e89ae03a508053d2a69a04737a1a1afb2c5f (patch)
tree213938692f2addc8d51c5fb58541b1ffe88319b7
parent47656dfbc4c8cde848754fb81fa7157094d24c07 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-2d97e89ae03a508053d2a69a04737a1a1afb2c5f.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-2d97e89ae03a508053d2a69a04737a1a1afb2c5f.zip
Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee
-rw-r--r--a9/382332a0f442e229befd6d3b9c31141287280a144
1 files changed, 144 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/a9/382332a0f442e229befd6d3b9c31141287280a b/a9/382332a0f442e229befd6d3b9c31141287280a
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..685f028a8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/a9/382332a0f442e229befd6d3b9c31141287280a
@@ -0,0 +1,144 @@
+Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
+ helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
+ by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
+ (envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1Z5wy9-00068N-88
+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:08:33 +0000
+Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
+ designates 62.13.149.75 as permitted sender)
+ client-ip=62.13.149.75; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
+ helo=outmail149075.authsmtp.net;
+Received: from outmail149075.authsmtp.net ([62.13.149.75])
+ by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
+ id 1Z5wy8-0003uD-12 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
+ Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:08:33 +0000
+Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
+ by punt16.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5JE8M6j050294;
+ Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:08:22 +0100 (BST)
+Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
+ [75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
+ by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t5JE8FOg044884
+ (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
+ Fri, 19 Jun 2015 15:08:18 +0100 (BST)
+Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 10:08:15 -0400
+From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
+To: Adrian Macneil <adrian@coinbase.com>
+Message-ID: <20150619140815.GA32470@savin.petertodd.org>
+References: <20150619103959.GA32315@savin.petertodd.org>
+ <CABsx9T1pnT=Tty3+tg+EUphLwQrWXf9EEwUOGuyNcdu=4wAqTg@mail.gmail.com>
+ <20150619135245.GB28875@savin.petertodd.org>
+ <CAMK47c_kCgb6hEUf_JePAC_tBK8aCF1W4f1guiAah-Gj_cFfSw@mail.gmail.com>
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
+ protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6"
+Content-Disposition: inline
+In-Reply-To: <CAMK47c_kCgb6hEUf_JePAC_tBK8aCF1W4f1guiAah-Gj_cFfSw@mail.gmail.com>
+User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
+X-Server-Quench: a2bfd31e-168c-11e5-b396-002590a15da7
+X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
+ http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
+X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
+ aQdMdwsUEkAaAgsB AmMbWlFeUFV7WGs7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
+ VklWR1pVCwQmRRl7 cxZoLU5ycwFOcHo+ ZENgXnAVDUYoIxJ+
+ QxtJFGsONnphaTUa TRJbfgVJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
+ NQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpY RgYVKF8UXXNDMGQE QBcGVTUmBgUIQSw5
+ KxEqYlABGEJZKEgq NVIqVBcSIlocBwA2
+X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
+X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
+X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
+X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
+ anti-virus system.
+X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
+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
+X-Headers-End: 1Z5wy8-0003uD-12
+Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
+Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee
+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: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:08:33 -0000
+
+
+--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
+Content-Disposition: inline
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+
+On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 07:00:56AM -0700, Adrian Macneil wrote:
+> >
+> > For instance, if Coinbase had
+> > contracts with 80% of the Bitcoin hashing power to guarantee their
+> > transactions would get mined, but 20% of the hashing power didn't sign
+> > up, then the only way to guarantee their transactions could be for the
+> > 80% to not build on blocks containing doublespends by the 20%.
+> >
+>=20
+> This seems to be more of a problem with centralized mining than zeroconf
+> transactions.
+
+You're mistaking cause and effect: the contracts will drive
+centralization of mining, as only the larger, non-anonymous, players
+have the ability to enter into such contracts.
+
+> Speaking of, could we get a confirmation that Coinbase is, or is not,
+> > one of the merchant service providers trying to get hashing power
+> > contracts with mining pools for guaranteed transaction acceptance? IIRC
+> > you are still an advisor to them. This is a serious concern for the
+> > reasons I outlined in my post.
+> >
+>=20
+> We have no contracts in place or plans to do this that I am aware of.
+>=20
+> However, we do rely pretty heavily on zeroconf transactions for merchant
+> processing, so if any significant portion of the mining pools started
+> running your unsafe RBF patch, then we would probably need to look into
+> this as a way to prevent fraud.
+
+What happens if the mining pools who are mining double-spends aren't
+doing it delibrately? Sybil attacking pools appears to have been done
+before to get double-spends though, equally there are many other changes
+the reduce the reliability of transaction confirmations. For instance
+the higher demands on bandwidth of a higher blocksize will inevitably
+reduce the syncronicity of mempools, resulting in double-spend
+opportunities. Similarly many proposals to limit mempool size allow
+zeroconf double-spends.
+
+In that case would you enter into such contracts?
+
+--=20
+'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
+000000000000000005a4c76d0bf088ef3e059914d6fc0335683a92b5be01b7dc
+
+--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
+Content-Description: Digital signature
+
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
+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==
+=+bMm
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
+
+--IJpNTDwzlM2Ie8A6--
+
+