Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 00:39:40 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: El_Hoy <eloyesp@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <Y47VnGNMt/p5W32U@petertodd.org>
References: <Y2I3w8O5X55sD/3C@petertodd.org> <Y2qc7Ubc5xtJhxGw@petertodd.org>
 <Y3MlSE7AWkBgiCyr@erisian.com.au> <Y3OljVGQbZ/Wj8T6@petertodd.org>
 <CAPapNH3NEBP2-GVZZ_75K-QU0psGdAHyjdAus-vfq-0jffTstg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cQJNYgALGzN5h1SE"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAPapNH3NEBP2-GVZZ_75K-QU0psGdAHyjdAus-vfq-0jffTstg@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Daniel Lipshitz <daniel@gap600.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Announcement: Full-RBF Miner Bounty
Precedence: list


--cQJNYgALGzN5h1SE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 09:20:58AM -0300, El_Hoy wrote:
> The only option I see against the attack Peter Todd is doing to opt-in RBF
> and 0Conf bitcoin usage is working on a bitcoin core implementation that
> stops propagation of full-rbf replaced blocks. Running multiple of such
> nodes on the network will add a risk to miners that enable full-rbf that
> would work as an incentive against that.
>=20
> Obviously that would require adding an option on bitcoin core (that is not
> technically but politically difficult to implement as Petter Todd already
> have commit access to the main repository).

For the record, I do not and have never had commit access to anything under
https://github.com/bitcoin

The last time I contributed to Bitcoin Core was in Mar 1st 2017, and that w=
as
to add an explanatory comment. Pretty much the only reason why you know my =
name
is I'm very good at argument and critique, I come up with some good ideas, =
and
conference organizers love to put me on stage.

> That said, a sufficiently incentivized actor (like Daniel Lipshitz or Muun
> wallet developers) could work on a fork and run several nodes with such
> functionality. As far as I understand the percolation model, with 10 to 20
> nodes running such a rule would create a significant risk for full-rbf
> miners.

You do not understand the percolation model.

10 or 20 nodes is completely meaningless. Pools run nodes themselves, which=
 by
default connect to 8 outgoing peers. There's about 5000 IPv4 listening node=
s on
the network. When a node learns of a new block, it tells all it's peers that
the new block exists.

For your censorship to work, there has to be a substantial propability that=
 a
miner *only* runs a single node (they don't), that has no incoming peers, a=
nd
all 8 peers of that node happen to be one of your 20 censoring nodes.
Obviously, since the probability of a given peer being a censoring node is
20/5000, all 8 being censored is extraordinarily unlikely.

Even if you ran so many nodes that 20% of the entire network was censoring,=
 the
probability of all 8 outgoing peers being censors is only 0.2^8 =3D 0.00025=
6%


This is an example of information being hard to censor and easy to spread. =
In
fact, for full-rbf this same math works in our favor: for a node to have a =
50%
chance of connecting to at least one full-rbf peer, just 8.3% of the network
needs to run full-rbf. 5000 IPv4 nodes * 8% =3D 400 nodes.

The percolation threshold doesn't need to be met for this to be succesful,
because someone to just run a full-rbf node that connects to every single
listening node simultaneously.


Anyway, as others' have pointed out, you're idea is also broken in other wa=
ys.
But I thought it'd be worth pointing out how futile it is to even try.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--cQJNYgALGzN5h1SE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=BH9F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--cQJNYgALGzN5h1SE--