Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 394A7B4A for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:45:01 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.148.154]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77962E0 for ; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:45:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) by punt21.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id tBK4iwOQ008143; Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:44:58 GMT Received: from muck ([24.114.64.12]) (authenticated bits=128) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id tBK4ipt9045288 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Sun, 20 Dec 2015 04:44:55 GMT Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2015 20:44:51 -0800 From: Peter Todd To: Chris Priest Message-ID: <20151220044450.GA23942@muck> References: <20151219184240.GB12893@muck> <4882BD35-D890-4860-9222-5C23AEB6AE89@mattcorallo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Server-Quench: 6b835378-a6d4-11e5-829e-00151795d556 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdAIUHFAXAgsB AmMbW1BeVFl7XGQ7 aQ5PbARZfExKQQRo T01BRU1TWkEaehhY RloXUh13dQ1ONnh0 YkEsWCJTX0F5ck5g E0gAEXAHZDJldWgd WRVFdwNVdQJNdxoR b1V5GhFYa3VsNCMk FAgyOXU9MCtqYBtY CgcAIF5aXUFDED8s DwwCEH0lGUoORG0s LgAmKlkYEEcXPQ07 LUcoUlFw X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 24.114.64.12/587 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] We need to fix the block withholding attack 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, 20 Dec 2015 04:45:01 -0000 --Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Dec 19, 2015 at 07:43:59PM -0800, Chris Priest via bitcoin-dev wrot= e: > Then shouldn't this be something the pool deals with, not the bitcoin pro= tocol? There is no known way for pools - especially ones that allow anonymous hashers - to effectively prevent block withholding attacks without changing the Bitcoin protocol. --=20 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 00000000000000000188b6321da7feae60d74c7b0becbdab3b1a0bd57f10947d --Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQGrBAEBCACVBQJWdjI/XhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMTg4YjYzMjFkYTdmZWFlNjBkNzRjN2IwYmVjYmRhYjNi MWEwYmQ1N2YxMDk0N2QvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0 ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQwIXyHOf0udw1/Af9EiRXxOtMDSHqNtEbdpWOHYR1 aSwYgR46R5IJ9fqEIyeFKrGbaPt8irkwUn2+OU2KVGfNiSuqQDC+OlUld6vKvrwg 6CpwmKq/vhWLHEaSdQ6GYtrMOnRHsXtVuKSTjELDglFnDDQ7/zh0IwicO44dffjf tYTmE3h74O4Fl1pQVOe9VYS4FZmc+mtSJARNUQwTp2m2kHxD6UL7PhTUIYIEie+m g71MZI+/P8eRHSKorL60CJwW8oFhi+FigyGptsXEEUsKWPmDJSIJZHtOEg4rwtin nGTO7IIT3iLf9y1+QDC14JRZOfUeDUOD6WGnSi7JnyseJ2Dp6cNvBtLV2kAdfg== =rkLX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Q68bSM7Ycu6FN28Q--