Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VdmNN-0001o3-Mg for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 19:33:21 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.42; envelope-from=jameson.lopp@gmail.com; helo=mail-qa0-f42.google.com; Received: from mail-qa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.216.42]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VdmNM-0005PD-Vw for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 19:33:21 +0000 Received: by mail-qa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id ii20so781123qab.8 for ; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:33:15 -0800 (PST) X-Received: by 10.49.71.131 with SMTP id v3mr12486336qeu.85.1383679995512; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:33:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.119.206] (BRONTO-SOFT.car1.Raleigh1.Level3.net. [4.59.160.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 5sm70403719qao.3.2013.11.05.11.33.14 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Nov 2013 11:33:15 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <527947FA.8070508@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 14:33:14 -0500 From: Jameson Lopp User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <20131105170541.GA13660@petertodd.org> <20131105171445.GA13710@petertodd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (jameson.lopp[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1VdmNM-0005PD-Vw Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP proposal - patch to raise selfish mining threshold. X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 19:33:21 -0000 The conversations that spawned from this paper have been fascinating to read, but I have a problem with the conclusions. To quote the paper: "The Bitcoin ecosystem is open to manipulation, and potential takeover, by miners seeking to maximize their rewards. This paper presented Selfish-Mine, a mining strategy that enables pools of colluding miners that adopt it to earn revenues in excess of their mining power. Higher revenues can lead new rational miners to join sel sh miner pools, leading to a collapse of the decentralized currency." Please explain to me why any rational miner would collude to earn slightly higher short term profits at the expense of then wiping out the value of all their bitcoins in the long term. Also, if you felt that this vulnerability is an immediate danger to the Bitcoin network, why publish the vulnerability publicly rather than first disclosing it privately to the core developers? Apologies if you did disclose it privately in the past; I've seen no mention of it. -- Jameson Lopp Software Engineer Bronto Software On 11/05/2013 01:58 PM, Jeff Garzik wrote: > On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 1:55 PM, Alessandro Parisi wrote: >> this means that anytime a bug is found in Bitcoin protocol, chances are that >> it would take a lot more time to get fixed > > Correct. There is significant potential that a fix can create other > problems... and any major mistake could instantly destroy > $2 > billion worth of value. >