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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <tamas@bitsofproof.com>) id 1Xb7Ys-00010U-E9
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 06 Oct 2014 12:38:46 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de ([80.237.132.66])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Xb7Yq-0004nX-UP
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 06 Oct 2014 12:38:46 +0000
Received: from wsip-70-165-172-128.lv.lv.cox.net ([70.165.172.128]);
authenticated
by wp059.webpack.hosteurope.de running ExIM with esmtpsa
(TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16)
id 1Xb7JX-0005Cx-K2; Mon, 06 Oct 2014 14:22:55 +0200
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Tamas Blummer <tamas@bitsofproof.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2_9tRGpZ4gySHvohy0g2PsaQF9u+-tZ-bmn8JtgweihA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2014 05:22:51 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <C91A515E-E08F-4112-B4A3-1B0FCF5E60C8@bitsofproof.com>
References: <5431CD8D.7050508@certimix.com>
<CAAS2fgQ-MrmBGjcuqYdvfs0g2b6+vAOVR3sUCCyQy386CY8EDA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAKJtGK2hdO+eTv6Hf9OhdetMmgTARHwQmmdEt_K489QFJOatPA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgSRnnjPdW0oHCkE=deLLv8w0z0syGeeXjb1EaF1xLrtJQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2_9tRGpZ4gySHvohy0g2PsaQF9u+-tZ-bmn8JtgweihA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-bounce-key: webpack.hosteurope.de; tamas@bitsofproof.com; 1412599125;
21f22d3f;
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [80.237.132.66 listed in list.dnswl.org]
X-Headers-End: 1Xb7Yq-0004nX-UP
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] The Bitcoin Freeze on Transaction Attack
(FRONT)
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: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 12:38:46 -0000
Note that the problem might arise also by a bug / accident and not as an =
attack.
Since value spent is not part of the signature it is easy to create an =
arbitrary fee by a defective wallet software.
Collecting that huge fee might provide a higher incentive to miner than =
the block subsidy on the trunk.
Assuming miner are fully rational, they might even form a temporary =
coalition to claim the fee:
The miner who mines forking block might offer part of the fee gained in =
a similar transaction to
other miners, so they help to extend his fork. A sufficiently high stake =
could trigger a long
fork =93battle=94 of ad-hoc coalitions.
Addressing the known bug of the signature hash, that it does not include =
the value spent,
would have other positive effects, e.g. for resource limited hardware =
wallets.
Interpretation of an OP_NOP for a value hashing signature check were =
suggested by Alan Reiner
discussed earlier on bitcointalk.
Tamas Blummer=
|
