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
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
|
Return-Path: <dscotese@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DE3DC88
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Mar 2016 16:38:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ob0-f179.google.com (mail-ob0-f179.google.com
[209.85.214.179])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 731421B2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 3 Mar 2016 16:38:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ob0-f179.google.com with SMTP id rt7so24905150obb.3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 03 Mar 2016 08:38:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
:from:to:cc; bh=qkklEvAQ0aPSXhNLqjk+R3ta8iC6239H5WIUNkallr4=;
b=M4R4yfKAmarxzIkGQJAvfCyUACuywmGLxC+DNuKcmOqybnjxicG6NKLFow/7pKG74k
VMctuwND+0QGbix5LrQol4CpP+PDxFT8keByzyfyQunzsew3vRidceZ9vXpNM6Tgx0XP
g2a7W7Ythvva0hGrkIOY2ksRfm/c1iMTdxzV82Qqcw4wW+bhrrlNx+3GVSDo919FRt4n
kcKixEg6xuCYGeOJtz/AAtVey/lOTgV9g1GX+g+mUScPRpdc/iBMIfyqHr7sp1+rl0Ed
8jxMA/qKbr/TGwrzDYUE2iaE36K7EuwBATWKrClPN1ZUzeu9jsWu6+B24+EslCrxqwOQ
Hiew==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:message-id:subject:from:to:cc;
bh=qkklEvAQ0aPSXhNLqjk+R3ta8iC6239H5WIUNkallr4=;
b=Hxtt6+DTW6yG8UWtXID0lhwDLSZa31kN/fGpfKsYFE6egH4XliKv05T2Px9tJI0EFz
WUa6VjKRPbxkwsZ67vUYHGhQeIXlSD/woP3G1eDBbfsPYQv2xTe0r8FechpZCwtpSAee
pJQsZYJJqsmwqbpleKUZlFPO+NnrAqMMKwPwFWyDpi9js6Dw9Q10PZSoPgsoASwqDRRz
/FxRsXYZA/EeKsiuOjuRQ2q0rS8BwRpmSWleAMcTNPnxokbUssEOEtkmm4wwezGKWzp6
Wi+oj4QGiZwc6fK79tlYLW59k55xO5zre/s7zJaWw3tIRm2BoHx8frUvfDVKmFr52enQ
Birg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKkheYrVbC6aHsnoki9+IVBqNwR6ab5e0+NLgX7CJTSZc4/8AXzdEVhs3H6tmkx+a3dJzIMVnmDyVM45g==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.141.227 with SMTP id rr3mr1462732oeb.57.1457023097724;
Thu, 03 Mar 2016 08:38:17 -0800 (PST)
Sender: dscotese@gmail.com
Received: by 10.60.55.71 with HTTP; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:38:17 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CABm2gDqbxAkZzfycEzX7370CAYMsyzL=L3tAKh6CNO4QOJyLsg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <56D835D3.9070902@librelamp.com>
<20160303150418.GA2341@banane.informatik.uni-ulm.de>
<CABm2gDqbxAkZzfycEzX7370CAYMsyzL=L3tAKh6CNO4QOJyLsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 08:38:17 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: nOQv66unX8XvaSIDJaiozuIezEc
Message-ID: <CAGLBAheHCKQ8kG1UKMcmR_NSqLj4stBzUrqmw63Y=a+eVWqwOw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Scotese <dscotese@litmocracy.com>
To: =?UTF-8?B?Sm9yZ2UgVGltw7Nu?= <jtimon@jtimon.cc>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b33957d2b7b5a052d27a079
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 21:00:55 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] consensus rule change for TX fee safety
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: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 16:38:20 -0000
--047d7b33957d2b7b5a052d27a079
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It would be a shame to prohibit someone from rewarding whoever mines their
transaction. A good example would be a transaction designed to record some
information which is damning to powerful authorities, sort of like the
service cryptograffiti offers. When we try to protect others by
prohibiting behavior we think is foolish, we may save some fools, but at
the same time, we hurt the best of us.
On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:36 AM, Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> There's an absurd fee (non-consensus) check already. Maybe that check ca=
n
> be improved, but probably the wallet layer is more appropriate for this.
> On Mar 3, 2016 16:23, "Henning Kopp via bitcoin-dev" <
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> I think there is no need to do a hardfork for this. Rather it should
>> be implemented as a safety-mechanism in the client. Perhaps a warning
>> can pop up, if one of your conditions A) or B) is met.
>>
>> All the best
>> Henning Kopp
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 05:02:11AM -0800, Alice Wonder via bitcoin-dev
>> wrote:
>> > I think the next hard fork should require a safety rule for TX fees.
>> >
>> >
>> https://blockchain.info/tx/6fe69404e6c12b25b60fcd56cc6dc9fb169b24608943d=
ef6dbe1eb0a9388ed08
>> >
>> > 15 BTC TX fee for < 7 BTC of outputs.
>> >
>> > Probably either a typo or client bug.
>> >
>> > My guess is the user was using a client that does not adjust TX fee, a=
nd
>> > needed to manually set it in order to get the TX in the block sooner,
>> and
>> > meant 15 mBTC or something.
>> >
>> > I suggest that either :
>> >
>> > A) TX fee may not be larger than sum of outputs
>> > B) TX fee per byte may not be larger than 4X largest fee per byte in
>> > previous block
>> >
>> > Either of those would have prevented this TX from going into a block.
>> >
>> > Many people I know are scared of bitcoin, that they will make a TX and
>> make
>> > a mistake they can't undo.
>> >
>> > Adding protections may help give confidence and there is precedence to
>> doing
>> > things to prevent typo blunders - a public address has a four byte
>> checksum
>> > to reduce the odds of a typo.
>> >
>> > This kind of mistake is rare, so a fix could be included in the coming
>> HF
>> > for the possible July 2017 block increase.
>> >
>> > Thank you for your time.
>> >
>> > Alice Wonder
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>> >
>>
>> --
>> Henning Kopp
>> Institute of Distributed Systems
>> Ulm University, Germany
>>
>> Office: O27 - 3402
>> Phone: +49 731 50-24138
>> Web: http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp
>> _______________________________________________
>> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
>
--=20
I like to provide some work at no charge to prove my value. Do you need a
techie?
I own Litmocracy <http://www.litmocracy.com> and Meme Racing
<http://www.memeracing.net> (in alpha).
I'm the webmaster for The Voluntaryist <http://www.voluntaryist.com> which
now accepts Bitcoin.
I also code for The Dollar Vigilante <http://dollarvigilante.com/>.
"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" - Satoshi
Nakamoto
--047d7b33957d2b7b5a052d27a079
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr">It would be a shame to prohibit someone from rewarding who=
ever mines their transaction.=C2=A0 A good example would be a transaction d=
esigned to record some information which is damning to powerful authorities=
, sort of like the service cryptograffiti offers.=C2=A0 When we try to prot=
ect others by prohibiting behavior we think is foolish, we may save some fo=
ols, but at the same time, we hurt the best of us.<br></div><div class=3D"g=
mail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:36 AM, =
Jorge Tim=C3=B3n <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.or=
g</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir=3D"ltr">Th=
ere's=C2=A0 an absurd fee (non-consensus) check already. Maybe that che=
ck can be improved, but probably the wallet layer is more appropriate for t=
his.</p><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mar 3, 2016 16:23, "Henning Kopp via bit=
coin-dev" <<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"=
target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br =
type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 =
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
I think there is no need to do a hardfork for this. Rather it should<br>
be implemented as a safety-mechanism in the client. Perhaps a warning<br>
can pop up, if one of your conditions A) or B) is met.<br>
<br>
All the best<br>
Henning Kopp<br>
<br>
<br>
On Thu, Mar 03, 2016 at 05:02:11AM -0800, Alice Wonder via bitcoin-dev wrot=
e:<br>
> I think the next hard fork should require a safety rule for TX fees.<b=
r>
><br>
> <a href=3D"https://blockchain.info/tx/6fe69404e6c12b25b60fcd56cc6dc9fb=
169b24608943def6dbe1eb0a9388ed08" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">http=
s://blockchain.info/tx/6fe69404e6c12b25b60fcd56cc6dc9fb169b24608943def6dbe1=
eb0a9388ed08</a><br>
><br>
> 15 BTC TX fee for < 7 BTC of outputs.<br>
><br>
> Probably either a typo or client bug.<br>
><br>
> My guess is the user was using a client that does not adjust TX fee, a=
nd<br>
> needed to manually set it in order to get the TX in the block sooner, =
and<br>
> meant 15 mBTC or something.<br>
><br>
> I suggest that either :<br>
><br>
> A) TX fee may not be larger than sum of outputs<br>
> B) TX fee per byte may not be larger than 4X largest fee per byte in<b=
r>
> previous block<br>
><br>
> Either of those would have prevented this TX from going into a block.<=
br>
><br>
> Many people I know are scared of bitcoin, that they will make a TX and=
make<br>
> a mistake they can't undo.<br>
><br>
> Adding protections may help give confidence and there is precedence to=
doing<br>
> things to prevent typo blunders - a public address has a four byte che=
cksum<br>
> to reduce the odds of a typo.<br>
><br>
> This kind of mistake is rare, so a fix could be included in the coming=
HF<br>
> for the possible July 2017 block increase.<br>
><br>
> Thank you for your time.<br>
><br>
> Alice Wonder<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_bl=
ank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
> <a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-=
dev" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
><br>
<br>
--<br>
Henning Kopp<br>
Institute of Distributed Systems<br>
Ulm University, Germany<br>
<br>
Office: O27 - 3402<br>
Phone: <a href=3D"tel:%2B49%20731%2050-24138" value=3D"+497315024138" targe=
t=3D"_blank">+49 731 50-24138</a><br>
Web: <a href=3D"http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp" rel=3D"noreferrer" targe=
t=3D"_blank">http://www.uni-ulm.de/in/vs/~kopp</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br><div class=3D"gmail=
_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr">I like to provide some work at no charge to pr=
ove my value. Do you need a techie?=C2=A0 <br>I own <a href=3D"http://www.l=
itmocracy.com" target=3D"_blank">Litmocracy</a> and <a href=3D"http://www.m=
emeracing.net" target=3D"_blank">Meme Racing</a> (in alpha). <br>I'm th=
e webmaster for <a href=3D"http://www.voluntaryist.com" target=3D"_blank">T=
he Voluntaryist</a> which now accepts Bitcoin.<br>I also code for <a href=
=3D"http://dollarvigilante.com/" target=3D"_blank">The Dollar Vigilante</a>=
.<br>"He ought to find it more profitable to play by the rules" -=
Satoshi Nakamoto</div></div>
</div>
--047d7b33957d2b7b5a052d27a079--
|
