diff options
author | Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> | 2022-10-13 14:35:22 +1000 |
---|---|---|
committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2022-10-13 04:35:33 +0000 |
commit | bedf4fa66929b0e69ad81b5eb6d527cd46f57b5b (patch) | |
tree | 554b7f75fbdca37a07a6bd4478f267d0d70a03a5 | |
parent | 9c0c318473bdaeabdae091bd48e453cc3b48368f (diff) | |
download | pi-bitcoindev-bedf4fa66929b0e69ad81b5eb6d527cd46f57b5b.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-bedf4fa66929b0e69ad81b5eb6d527cd46f57b5b.zip |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate danger
-rw-r--r-- | b4/378eb9c92c9bd77c8993e27c3bfe9dd0f384ed | 139 |
1 files changed, 139 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/b4/378eb9c92c9bd77c8993e27c3bfe9dd0f384ed b/b4/378eb9c92c9bd77c8993e27c3bfe9dd0f384ed new file mode 100644 index 000000000..375fe74c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/b4/378eb9c92c9bd77c8993e27c3bfe9dd0f384ed @@ -0,0 +1,139 @@ +Return-Path: <aj@erisian.com.au> +Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 968D1C002D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 13 Oct 2022 04:35:33 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60CF683E76 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 13 Oct 2022 04:35:33 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 60CF683E76 +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: 0.599 +X-Spam-Level: +X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, MONEY_NOHTML=2.499, + SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] + autolearn=no autolearn_force=no +Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id GnVPNONzKP_G + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 13 Oct 2022 04:35:32 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 2DC2283E69 +Received: from azure.erisian.com.au (azure.erisian.com.au [172.104.61.193]) + by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DC2283E69 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Thu, 13 Oct 2022 04:35:32 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from aj@azure.erisian.com.au (helo=sapphire.erisian.com.au) + by azure.erisian.com.au with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92 #3 (Debian)) + id 1oipwM-0001o8-Lz; Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:35:28 +1000 +Received: by sapphire.erisian.com.au (sSMTP sendmail emulation); + Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:35:22 +1000 +Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2022 14:35:22 +1000 +From: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> +To: Pieter Wuille <bitcoin-dev@wuille.net>, + Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Message-ID: <Y0d/e2sEoNRgD7KP@erisian.com.au> +References: <Y0ZTtlRSBihNN9+v@erisian.com.au> + <0hpdGx-1WbZdG31xaMXGHKTCjJ2-0eB5aIXUdsp3bqI1MlCx6TMZWROwpl1TVI5irrBqRN2-ydM6hmf3M5L-7ZQfazbx66oameiWTHayr6w=@wuille.net> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <0hpdGx-1WbZdG31xaMXGHKTCjJ2-0eB5aIXUdsp3bqI1MlCx6TMZWROwpl1TVI5irrBqRN2-ydM6hmf3M5L-7ZQfazbx66oameiWTHayr6w=@wuille.net> +X-Spam-Score-int: -18 +X-Spam-Bar: - +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate + danger +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 +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, 13 Oct 2022 04:35:33 -0000 + +On Wed, Oct 12, 2022 at 04:11:05PM +0000, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> In my view, it is just what I said: a step towards getting full RBF +> on the network, by allowing experimentation and socializing the notion +> that developers believe it is time. + +We "believe it is time" for what exactly, though? (a) To start +deprerecating accepting zeroconf txs on mainnet, over the next 6, 12 or +18 months; or (b) to start switching mainnet mining and relay nodes over +to full RBF? + +As far as experimentation goes, I don't really see this option as being +very likely to help: the default for this option is still false, so it's +likely going to be difficult to get non-opt-in RBF txs relayed or mined +anywhere, even on testnet or signet, no? (Maybe that's a difficulty that's +resolved by an addnode, but it's still a difficulty) If experimentation's +the goal, making the default be true for testnet/signet at least seems +like it would be pretty useful at least. Meaningful experimentation is +probably kind of difficult in the first place while fees are low and +there's often no backlog in the mempool, as well; something that perhaps +applies more to test nets than mainnet even. + +If we're trying to socialise the idea that zeroconf deprecation is +happening and that your business now has a real deadline for migrating +away from accepting unconfirmed txs if the risk of being defrauded +concerns you, then enabling experimentation on test nets and not touching +mainnet until a later release seems fairly fine to me -- similar to +activating soft forks on test nets prior to activating it on mainnet. + +> So I have a hard time imagining how it +> would change anything *immediately* on the network at large (without +> things like default on and/or preferential peering, ...), but I still +> believe it's an important step. + +If we're instead trying to socialise the idea that relaying and mining +full RBF txs on mainnet should be starting now, then I think that's +exactly how this *would* change things almost immediately on the network +at large. + +I think all it would take in practice to be able to repeatedly defraud +businesses accepting unconfirmed txs is perhaps 5% or 10% of blocks +to include full RBF txs [0] [1], and knowing some IP addresses to +addnode so that your txs relayed to those miners. And if core devs are +advocating that full RBF is ready now [2], and a patch to easily enable +it is included in a bitcoin core release, why wouldn't some small pools +start trying it out, leading to exactly that situation? + +If most of the network doesn't relay your full-rbf txs, then that's +annoying for protocol developers who'd like to rely on it, but it's fine +for an attacker: it just means the business you're trying to trick has +less chance of noticing the attack before it's too late, because they'll +be less likely to see the conflicting tx via both their own node or +public explorers. + +Cheers, +aj + +[0] A few months ago, Peter Todd reported switching an OTS calendar to do + non-opt-in RBF, and didn't observe bumped txs being mined, which seems + to indicate there's not much hash power currently mining full RBF. + https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-June/020592.html + +[1] Also why I remain surprised that accepting zeroconf is safe enough + in practice for anyone to do it. I suppose 5% of hashpower is perhaps + $100M+ investment in ASICs and $900k/day in revenue, and perhaps + all the current ways of enabling full RBF are considered too risky + to mess around with at that level. + +[2] Antoine Riard's mail from June (that Peter's mail above was in reply + to) announced such a public node, and encouraged miners to start + adoption: "If you're a mining operator looking to increase your + income, you might be interested to experiment with full-rbf + as a policy." Presuming the IRC channel "##uafrbf" stands + for "user-activated full rbf", that also seems in line with + the goal being to socialise doing full RBF on mainnet immediately... + https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-June/020557.html + + |