1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
|
Return-Path: <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC31EE8F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 18 Dec 2015 05:32:32 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vk0-f44.google.com (mail-vk0-f44.google.com
[209.85.213.44])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4029D2F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 18 Dec 2015 05:32:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vk0-f44.google.com with SMTP id a189so59555289vkh.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:32:32 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=jtimon-cc.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=8O/1K5dq5VtU+wEzJTiDg+D5sQZGO6v8NJQk8EdVrNw=;
b=RbBaOF5Y8Yd2LKf9G6/rlMkElI5dxgv1yC3kr4TqJ4ZCviEpexxxAOSg7K1CbRHGSQ
sTejLIZ5TpEsj3ZkZNJVcEfOwuOTNmtDH7eUG8T7OjPjpFJf6C9XEZYlc4d63f0UsZ2I
2G4OPqMEBCSTexuxGelYtNqPbZqZm/JjRYtuzGPFKKpHwJwPUX8NvyjRhDw0/IQ0Ca1G
L5b/fOX2AMQuJsw2unCbveQ97+R5p2GhJZ+43dz8gR+YWS5l0YU5G8iNDpHEWUpPkVFo
GpXMfQIxssm7BBmZ+KYUXgoMzCPMBS4tEa655p/fw0h6ACTkGnpLyglwYNZ0zUFjXmRc
W12g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=8O/1K5dq5VtU+wEzJTiDg+D5sQZGO6v8NJQk8EdVrNw=;
b=ExdJUfOcnBPCuw9qMFclwPufBsu31WlYmddUZFxbBsuoqTnu9cvugYgCt/rDQCj1LN
nDeJILKF7vmvbUdevLBCudVFSppfu6iQQP7RDwVBIrGmmpxDNH3sUq/0l64OosPg+/0U
vuNvpSblVH+LAwKOLTENtGV4aeaBe4DtzbsVa9EKKaogBMTT3nKNbwhVNk9X5jrtbXZw
nPe1pzx+JooFVPmXxWcK1xLyxdsXIW51Db+ZMCnXrWDw/XiUUFmEpD2unt4M0MG/yjYm
zwzgc9qfL7VW8HrWcc/ePwNCRQpBXHBShebg5srX+tWdqw1iTzz7gOrJXVfAYatqByON
J01g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmFqXqIV0lVk+8gAoz7/mzbAPdT8tMQQQvQAIMsemZfu0nd3E5Asj07M4aoCL/WxN8qbr+oquO9RZay6LG57mixScVjKw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.31.140.199 with SMTP id o190mr1049731vkd.63.1450416751247;
Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:32:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.31.236.70 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 21:32:31 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <6bc6451f3d9cfb5e5a1ba15356c229bc@xbt.hk>
References: <CAPg+sBjJcqeqGLHnPyWt23z3YoCRGozQupuMxy51J_-hdkKBSA@mail.gmail.com>
<E76D5BF9-41BF-4AF5-BBAC-06F4EF574EBE@toom.im>
<6bc6451f3d9cfb5e5a1ba15356c229bc@xbt.hk>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 06:32:31 +0100
Message-ID: <CABm2gDqo_W-T3n78O-4wLAv7C2iyJFXo_r6JHxdaStBz9aPocA@mail.gmail.com>
From: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
To: jl2012 <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,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 <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] On the security of softforks
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2015 05:32:32 -0000
To me it's getting clearer and clearer that th frintier between
softforks and hardforks it's softer than we thought.
Aoftforks should start having a minimum median time deplayment day (be
it height or median time, I don't care, just not header.nTime).
TYDGFHdfthfg64565$%^$
On Fri, Dec 18, 2015 at 4:10 AM, jl2012 via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev =E6=96=BC 2015-12-17 21:47 =E5=AF=AB=E5=
=88=B0:
>>
>> Mallory wants to defraud Bob with a 1 BTC payment for some beer. Bob
>> runs the old rules. Bob creates a p2pkh address for Mallory to use.
>> Mallory takes 1 BTC, and creates an invalid SegWit transaction that
>> Bob cannot properly validate and that pays into one of Mallory's
>> wallets. Mallory then immediately spends the unconfirmed transaction
>> into Bob's address. Bob sees what appears to be a valid transaction
>> chain which is not actually valid.
>>
>> Clueless Carol is one of the 4.9% of miners who forgot to upgrade her
>> mining node. Carol sees that Mallory included an enormous fee in his
>> transactions, so Carol makes sure to include both transactions in her
>> block.
>>
>> Mallory gets free beer.
>>
>> Anything I'm missing?
>
>
> You miss the fact that 0-conf is not safe, neither 1-conf. What you are
> suggesting is just a variation of Finney attack.
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
