summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorEric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>2016-11-17 03:22:03 -0800
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2016-11-17 11:22:04 +0000
commit5c973e139bae0a70af60adc8e2d5850cfea4a0d5 (patch)
tree46d0f315256a116635f89770dc1488b7a2b35ea0
parentdeed15441eecdc47d6266ad60739f7bfc90e1fba (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-5c973e139bae0a70af60adc8e2d5850cfea4a0d5.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-5c973e139bae0a70af60adc8e2d5850cfea4a0d5.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP30 and BIP34 interaction (was Re: [BIP Proposal] Buried Deployments)
-rw-r--r--1e/ec1d627a83dda6af1b9b48097dfc2ee2ce2583180
1 files changed, 180 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/1e/ec1d627a83dda6af1b9b48097dfc2ee2ce2583 b/1e/ec1d627a83dda6af1b9b48097dfc2ee2ce2583
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..f87087252
--- /dev/null
+++ b/1e/ec1d627a83dda6af1b9b48097dfc2ee2ce2583
@@ -0,0 +1,180 @@
+Return-Path: <eric@voskuil.org>
+Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
+ [172.17.192.35])
+ by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 887688DC
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:22:04 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
+Received: from mail-pg0-f47.google.com (mail-pg0-f47.google.com [74.125.83.47])
+ by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1DF9309
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Thu, 17 Nov 2016 11:22:03 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: by mail-pg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id 3so90943506pgd.0
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Thu, 17 Nov 2016 03:22:03 -0800 (PST)
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
+ d=voskuil-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
+ h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version
+ :in-reply-to; bh=pPofu3vxC/caTcjzFw3dt7ZVgljg5WvjpKxc6HoQWmE=;
+ b=ZwTyR8w+rX7Zk9IDrTZOV2vmGau6SMinOZW1PKe5M6SVsouJ52xxOeAUiylXLbHWlm
+ Hq3P377uxpSxjD+zqxyQDcQg7szg3rg4h4TLe1UwfSF6hnrxmgmd85JO12TSHeGJ0y4T
+ J8DhHFQeHqE0gv/lIeVJ0ZoPhaoJWKBCUx/+uuQoz6t9+l7DCG/LnKftAsNmK+bo/7Zo
+ CTjJWt/D3DHEUl2SG6CPvXMwi44MTwNwNpfag7sucDhTak0kMoeJS7SncDP6MRgrK5zf
+ 8lufxmFyOxZONsVIqWMALLXu6eopMy5C6opPyhOmqCbRvR3VFZATdE8p/M90NcOJKT79
+ OiyA==
+X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
+ d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
+ h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
+ :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to;
+ bh=pPofu3vxC/caTcjzFw3dt7ZVgljg5WvjpKxc6HoQWmE=;
+ b=WdKHWL2FZrcfKmUIOkk+6vrP/irGCeQ+kbT45+4v07n5lkv6kdVOe9aKDRMyOdqcdp
+ SRmjQs+KZmlSgWkvBClLsjhbGdyfG/AoEHnIEr1bJaqeNO6tNwhNmlCMy1wmyDhIruww
+ CV1vNiWGpmtsI6t3Nyv90LM4AEllZSweH3YbDVrnSA6B5eHG/iSyq6jhCrxUxAGmpEqH
+ TQBbNuqY+B5PpSmho8UrhPV0y4P3vO1YJd1QOKPVx4qq+JYirQKP9eXpUXsjsuTg0bAW
+ yuuPwHveyb/DmILhgXqLpSJoK3Gaow+PdCb65h9x4iM6rrg2tIvyCMBk2wGMIj834YFF
+ G14g==
+X-Gm-Message-State: ABUngvdJM9Kyysu4Sd2JVQtcWEwxCIE8OmBCx9B7RWsg/c/Xxx2OzHPetJ9rof5n6ayYnQ==
+X-Received: by 10.98.90.132 with SMTP id o126mr4021688pfb.41.1479381723164;
+ Thu, 17 Nov 2016 03:22:03 -0800 (PST)
+Received: from ?IPv6:2601:600:9000:d69e:8084:4206:2529:776d?
+ ([2601:600:9000:d69e:8084:4206:2529:776d])
+ by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
+ b64sm6426909pfc.74.2016.11.17.03.22.02
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+ (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
+ Thu, 17 Nov 2016 03:22:02 -0800 (PST)
+To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+References: <CABm2gDr2-MCiaFFjgUFP5Xc0fQfuqJ3=ZkrzjHqmOiwRZ50CBw@mail.gmail.com>
+ <d58ee114-00fd-23c8-9ca7-9a4b28c26f27@voskuil.org>
+ <CAE-z3OX5vak25UWcmBSe63OmoOVoGB394WmwyWwUcSxWeDOLhw@mail.gmail.com>
+ <e0e6679f-aec6-a579-667d-b5b58ea2360b@voskuil.org>
+ <CAE-z3OXfJa3Lewtrafm25bdfPa=eiarOAXBNbgc3ccTi7Qoe6A@mail.gmail.com>
+From: Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org>
+X-Enigmail-Draft-Status: N0110
+Message-ID: <5ef23296-5909-a350-ab11-e717f8fffc41@voskuil.org>
+Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 03:22:03 -0800
+User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
+ Thunderbird/45.3.0
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+In-Reply-To: <CAE-z3OXfJa3Lewtrafm25bdfPa=eiarOAXBNbgc3ccTi7Qoe6A@mail.gmail.com>
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
+ protocol="application/pgp-signature";
+ boundary="DtpSSIt28nqorWbD08hVUPGlwLuDDgmtH"
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
+ DKIM_VALID,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, 17 Nov 2016 11:22:42 +0000
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP30 and BIP34 interaction (was Re: [BIP
+ Proposal] Buried Deployments)
+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, 17 Nov 2016 11:22:04 -0000
+
+This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156)
+--DtpSSIt28nqorWbD08hVUPGlwLuDDgmtH
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+
+On 11/17/2016 02:22 AM, Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev wrote:
+> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 12:43 AM, Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org
+> <mailto:eric@voskuil.org>> wrote:
+>=20
+> > This means that all future transactions will have different txids=
+=2E..
+> rules do guarantee it.
+>=20
+> No, it means that the chance is small, there is a difference.
+>=20
+> I think we are mostly in agreement then? It is just terminology.
+
+Sure, if you accept that mostly is not fully - just as unlikely is not
+impossible.
+
+> In terms of discussing the BIP, barring a hash collision, it does make
+> duplicate txids impossible.
+
+That's like saying, as long as we exclude car accidents from
+consideration, car accidents are impossible.
+
+> Given that a hash collision is so unlikely, the qualifier should be
+> added to those making claims that require hash collisions rather than
+> those who assume that they aren't possible.
+>=20
+> You could have said "However nothing precludes different txs from havin=
+g
+> the same hash, but it requires a hash collision".
+
+I generally try to avoid speaking in tautologies :)
+
+> Thinking about it, a re-org to before the enforcement height could allo=
+w
+> it. The checkpoints protect against that though.
+> =20
+> As such this is not something that a node
+> can just dismiss.=20
+>=20
+> The security of many parts of the system is based on hash collisions no=
+t
+> being possible.
+
+This is not the case.
+
+Block hash duplicates within the same chain are invalid as a matter of
+consensus, which is the opposite of assuming impossibility.
+
+Tx hash collisions are explicitly allowed in the case that preceding tx
+with the same hash is unspent. This is also not a reliance on the
+impossibility of hash collision. Core certainly implements this distincti=
+on:
+
+https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/src/main.cpp#L2419-L2426
+
+Address hashes and script hashes can collide without harming the
+security of Bitcoin (although address owner(s) may experience harm).
+Rare in this case is sufficient because of this distinction.
+
+Compact blocks contemplates hash collisions:
+
+https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0152.mediawiki#Random_col=
+lision_probabilty
+
+Checkpoints aren't part of Bitcoin security, so even the remote
+possibility of two different potential blocks, with the same hash, at
+the same height in the same chain, does not indicate a problem.
+
+There is no case where the security of Bitcoin assumes that hashes never
+collide. Consensus rules have specific handling for both block hash
+collisions and tx hash collisions.
+
+e
+
+
+--DtpSSIt28nqorWbD08hVUPGlwLuDDgmtH
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
+Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
+Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
+
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
+Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
+
+iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJYLZLbAAoJEDzYwH8LXOFOFTQIAIdcDnwiwfv+5jFhwr6ZUU8J
+2gSZTlVCO7p7RYwqBrvB3oEm6N7Mxspn751SLzIea22LoPEL2OqJRB2l/rYwGJ1k
+lQ2eyInXt8CQICj0Dfa9p6zJnPzIGbauz4z462gc+XGceJv36sShrE3X5ZS61b5F
+W2vSC6jNBz3OlRg3KocCyhNaUDxDqWslE7iMdRzFNTCTsxWu3bc0ioblCsjvmmJo
+Xeb0+5kitMQK/jh0BvT2Tt1/0B9Ymeq9QeDg8sSaK9Cyw15ZEBmCPLIdYnumB7V3
+Jw8eo92FaXtHaaSwhRYIOn/MqrkIgsy4/+zk52LddXz+2pvsyvLRR+rCKhVCfJA=
+=zb3u
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
+
+--DtpSSIt28nqorWbD08hVUPGlwLuDDgmtH--
+