Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B753EC002D for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:10:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6744784177 for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:10:49 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 6744784177 Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=SK4LL6Co X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_FAIL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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 OXIKRmZBa3wB for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:10:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 1601583E2E Received: from new3-smtp.messagingengine.com (new3-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.229]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1601583E2E for ; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:10:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from compute4.internal (compute4.nyi.internal [10.202.2.44]) by mailnew.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7099958018B; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:04:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute4.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:04:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:date:feedback-id :feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id :mime-version:references:reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to :x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1665759897; x=1665767097; bh=2/Zu8su/wGfJhkhmEL0EcIxdaAkE fNbuEJbPksu0YAw=; b=SK4LL6Co84+H+OCBr1BGtQZTsGnOCQclV9jA4taI46CJ RDLZvdPW2Bl/5gDfQYbsPqBNZUtvULFVcYUdzuy9e1TfxP1QsWP8ocYojmrLNpUm VrXpOfQUmTb7df/eHcd3FEmm16WkZMtXG9P0lSmJIC8IsLVjB80D4lS5/wcFGcwE ituR9oih8SHbX9gcEmYz/vW83Xi8grxndIyl+rbgI0YeQw/SXVXfSVnOj4Zk4dZa tKDZqBHwRKiBbBt4+QtLH7r/ysY9AGHRCXe8v5DOJnb8ikc21kOEwJ1AmNuiwf5w L8XwAW7am0b7aPE/LTtbHWJ60uBb3EHT5850MTBo3A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvfedrfeekvddgkeehucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefrvghtvghr ucfvohguugcuoehpvghtvgesphgvthgvrhhtohguugdrohhrgheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvg hrnhepiedvvdelieekjeeukefgtdelfeegheehleffueehteeghfelveejfeelgeevffef necuffhomhgrihhnpehpvghtvghrthhouggurdhorhhgnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepphgvthgvsehpvghtvghrthhouggurdho rhhg X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:04:57 -0400 (EDT) Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 886F45F86C; Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:04:56 -0400 (EDT) Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 11:04:56 -0400 From: Peter Todd To: John Carvalho , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="uzWu6mFOXkyC6rM2" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2022 15:10:49 -0000 --uzWu6mFOXkyC6rM2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 12:03:21PM +0200, John Carvalho via bitcoin-dev wro= te: > In support of Dario's concern, I feel like there is a degree of gaslighti= ng > happening with the advancement of RBF somehow being okay, while merchants > wanting to manage their own 0conf risk better being not okay. The way merchants try to manage 0conf risk is quite harmful to Bitcoin. Connecting to large numbers of nodes to try to risk-manage propagation _is_= an attack, albeit a mild one. Everyone doing that is very harmful; only a few merchants being able to do it is very unfair/centralized. =2E..and of course, in the past this has lead to merchants trying to make d= eals with miners directly, even going as far as to suggest reorging out double-spends. I don't need to explain why that is obviously extremely harm= ful. --=20 https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org --uzWu6mFOXkyC6rM2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEE0RcYcKRzsEwFZ3N5Lly11TVRLzcFAmNJepIACgkQLly11TVR LzcUsw/+J0RjfX6NlTDp4zLpaQiCA54/Evl1Iw/gyVAAjmV6+U9wymMp6MmWIStQ Us5h1DxxVnvxeZo/RHytLldPgqXJOtfQsCGsTeCqPh8m2k3oTZsnNhynjwFUxJ/1 Osg638cJvu1SfxWjTXfIU3PNDT1Ab4+q3jvqgAPZs+RcFjEylZm2zNBl6oxRqceQ akRrZh2kjJIddiSl5t1vd75GUku9Gj9jLfuY2w07v0M9kLfwa1b/0zYjaZzkIW0s 0SlTynFoO52FJ8R+8ZGKjOC2JhDYzN4c22SkSOReUCxrlkj8GrqgKXnTddIkunR0 1KDSNsvDQgHEXASuRWTR7OxA+uEpt8w3ABAXtgF35aY8dkOT4hRn5GOmKL0EyJ1I roPdTRudua35mwV7XTM9CHKYd0dnk/qxX1kP+FOnkGC/SwUo8GIJSULixyDCbfHh E2SzTwF1Wrhh0HHpBW2hLjLDZiN54EdA7FVY/dMvWpiwZdO+HlF0NLV8O8j8QYJ+ Wg9qTieIiL9bwgKvlW9mtIZRijYXWSWql4gGXhDMncjQoBw2cv5iVzt5cg+WRDsF VsNlhLue5nqIrF/4HjttPfNUC6sLPM0JZaJ/JgIPficD5VmsOVuw1axM0cFFz3ot aCtwO9tY/66jgH2r8aPqB4fYylvII/EDSUY8Qbo2c3X49k1UM9E= =nQ8p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --uzWu6mFOXkyC6rM2--