Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <theymos@mm.st>) id 1Qu631-0000rJ-7f
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:06:27 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of mm.st
	designates 66.111.4.26 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=66.111.4.26; envelope-from=theymos@mm.st;
	helo=out2.smtp.messagingengine.com; 
Received: from out2.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.26])
	by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1Qu630-0004ae-Ey
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:06:27 +0000
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.43])
	by gateway1.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42ACC231BF
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:47:56 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from web3.messagingengine.com ([10.202.2.213])
	by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:47:56 -0400
Received: by web3.messagingengine.com (Postfix, from userid 99)
	id 1E58A9C0D07; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 12:47:56 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <1313686076.6324.140258131139585@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: fRXjN++VwA8Jneb10at8lMzZlz1LvU0kf1zErXbLWrAF 1313686076
From: "theymos" <theymos@mm.st>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T0AgUL+rphhB8YUVHDGJnc0TmaYG=kjt7Pz1yrwLjBbDQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T0AgUL+rphhB8YUVHDGJnc0TmaYG=kjt7Pz1yrwLjBbDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 11:47:56 -0500
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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
	(theymos[at]mm.st)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	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
	0.0 T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL To: misformatted and free email service
X-Headers-End: 1Qu630-0004ae-Ey
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] From the forums: one-confirmation attack
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 17:06:27 -0000

> The part of the network that did not receive my block first (which
> hopefully is most of the miners) will accept this as valid and work to
> include it in the next block.

To make this more difficult, nodes that receive new transactions via
blocks should relay the new transactions as if they had received them
normally. Then the double-spend transaction will be rejected by most of
the network because the other version is already widely-known.