summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAnthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au>2022-10-13 14:35:22 +1000
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2022-10-13 04:35:33 +0000
commitbedf4fa66929b0e69ad81b5eb6d527cd46f57b5b (patch)
tree554b7f75fbdca37a07a6bd4478f267d0d70a03a5
parent9c0c318473bdaeabdae091bd48e453cc3b48368f (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-bedf4fa66929b0e69ad81b5eb6d527cd46f57b5b.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-bedf4fa66929b0e69ad81b5eb6d527cd46f57b5b.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Opt-in full-RBF] Zero-conf apps in immediate danger
-rw-r--r--b4/378eb9c92c9bd77c8993e27c3bfe9dd0f384ed139
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
+
+