Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19DE0CAF for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 20:20:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-qk0-f176.google.com (mail-qk0-f176.google.com [209.85.220.176]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BF81A7 for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 20:20:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk0-f176.google.com with SMTP id o6so52918713qkc.2 for ; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:20:30 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=iCaQAFZE4RUCqQo4gjuJtpij/H88hfawMNwO6+SBVmw=; b=i8y2l4GDyKC7Qki32Rp/qwow9/zRxF7LYWp3T1/S/xOK2rFA+CrPsoY+Ca7L/qavOr Ayke0YBpsU3tqNN2Tn/U2eQf5067dMkApg0R4Hv0pnkOqb28UetaeB6p1PsSfcIx6WGs Dxj6ZSGgpj+AxxWe2PNdSQI1L+Hi9THJl4j2Yg5TxHyj8lP1t0rvN4+EmWE+z5II1Cv6 fjn2c0kg+K/OYe3Z/fs61m3hJ4OvyplMkIVB253awZoUln450Sn1IPPRaNBIL+/ocJjW FyIJu9HiU9ixGtXqDAEhPhfts7GTF9or7BHC4VxIiEsWbCN5TOXqwwRQtQ4Q2kr0naFO RUsw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=iCaQAFZE4RUCqQo4gjuJtpij/H88hfawMNwO6+SBVmw=; b=EVFc1XeX0KTslbgzz7K8hPxbZeS3zgTpW4sHeQehLiCQEo6/Q8KvVi3oNpIpAESX89 08/r09GzDOOXHXwj4uhIdtb9++A5dPBKLXFVikQizCisfMa8gcMHUy2r9b65jSqwvQYk 5HO/mJ+svm+iK+n/m4DpRepxdKpp5PDYK/NKojATMSL04FnhzHRqyL5cBJag0x1aDB/e PgKpymL9UoaMvE5QxvXgfc864mGI8z6WahpqqI/40vn0AcokSqlASoV014qxpFM8cJu6 YgefCGShHw6ocp5fnxhDnzoJX/B/vXhb10ebNub5xV7gt7e4QQX5+oDH/uRUbiNw8ikN iROg== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQFvbiqA5HrdEYdKTONDAAQuN0m0P+GYzdWot47Bhx06GuBqKHdmkyIhQtXSUe/Mw== X-Received: by 10.55.71.143 with SMTP id u137mr30365049qka.1.1454876429903; Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:20:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.0.40] (c-24-91-28-148.hsd1.ma.comcast.net. [24.91.28.148]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q6sm12428376qhq.21.2016.02.07.12.20.27 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 07 Feb 2016 12:20:28 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Gavin X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (13D15) In-Reply-To: <232901d161dd$a35f8d30$ea1ea790$@xbt.hk> Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 15:20:27 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <232901d161dd$a35f8d30$ea1ea790$@xbt.hk> To: jl2012@xbt.hk X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW 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: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 01:55:25 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hardfork bit BIP X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 20:20:31 -0000 > On Feb 7, 2016, at 2:27 PM, wrote: >=20 > Normal version number only suggests softforks, which is usually not a conc= ern for SPV clients. Soft forks affect the security of low-confirmation (zero or one) transaction= s sent to SPV wallets even more than hard forks, and because many users and b= usinesses choose convenience over airtight security I would argue transactio= n validation rule changes are a VERY big concern for lightweight clients.=