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
|
Return-Path: <kanzure@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CB37D60
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 20:51:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-ua0-f182.google.com (mail-ua0-f182.google.com
[209.85.217.182])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5226D1A0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 20:51:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua0-f182.google.com with SMTP id x18-v6so11597982uaj.9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=xYfp9j3MumKiNoe6udqRSwyfF34oSjb2lCFaFQRnrlE=;
b=GPAmn2WnWrMxeMQvgWsKfxfuShlbBmEkOISjaOyoAK9w0bBK9nO0Fwn6t8hCiGc6+k
buZJXskMp6QAOp92CaAeuFOXNj8VSkMP2nxQMFHEgyV7qICPViJfOcvQqRDCpmaYh1IY
1TWm2OrapMCT3QgacdlWfXYcUaASRYrfLqmW95dnIGEW+86uimNHMCBXlXhbkAHQqjBj
9zvZ4h6aFl/M0VDbmD+yhUehwzmz6QtXbzNmM5kR+cW0oZWuiHq0UBy+CdeGqHuiPK+8
9WCEFVXMRtfBp+vj3/t0v+Y9s4jxkGezAZbIsdPkvxsGy5ikYMRaaA9hRDKLVlLzyEmu
6sRQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=xYfp9j3MumKiNoe6udqRSwyfF34oSjb2lCFaFQRnrlE=;
b=seehVhTxhvnIXKjcZ3m76rdXj6uGDMOJOKOeOIVFsFU3qgyF3lFIdKiKMMRPh5YV/6
B04ZmRpTw5qx68tR/0hDrHdXquAnrI5/dYTBefj6szKe/Aod4uVfj7CtKeX5Xr3YSoHQ
pTpwN3ey+y9BQryQ1Xieif5XnzWh9g0GsaD0YV2ueO2g4iH6oQuevNcsd4kseg21MmlM
o7pdcK6XJaK6lI373GQ2sRfsk1y8eMl5TdGMZc+qmlU6KT4eKFVJ+duheid96N+rHAC8
qtDV12a72uZK+jezfWqTxhKGRlJEwjI0FN1jsF8YhnTMqDp5TQgECd6wGlOHw3o06SjC
Kdmw==
X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1DoRTdFCy6+wpNsOPPSsRKJ33o4YPPsRLua1BaI3LtUCW641BT
g/+xiPLtVWCfmFOtlseFEk3NSOfbCYwdYr2+ZDU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJhaiAh1xgg0BNlQyZcof3WUBKK0p9xDZoLLM5DrEF7lZTmTgsgRYXMxClyI3bKWh0gVcB3sQaEXTFxhnKZSL0=
X-Received: by 2002:ab0:30d:: with SMTP id 13-v6mr1370738uat.14.1529355094389;
Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:51:34 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 2002:ab0:2455:0:0:0:0:0 with HTTP; Mon, 18 Jun 2018 13:51:33
-0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAHUJnBAU2exMFgPTQx_+h_bktL3Z3B3rsh09aciVtRnGrHJBEw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJRVQkDM390Y4sVzA8WwM93PY4UqUa8gvPKkT-iA2UcYL6FQ+g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAHUJnBAU2exMFgPTQx_+h_bktL3Z3B3rsh09aciVtRnGrHJBEw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 15:51:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CABaSBayDe=92BFQXyX8oan4ptbOmQGHuAhEPjvq78MmazZFJ3g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bram Cohen <bram@chia.net>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
Bryan Bishop <kanzure@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000022fa94056ef0bb61"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Miner dilution attack on Bitcoin - is that
something plausible?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol 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: Mon, 18 Jun 2018 20:51:37 -0000
--00000000000022fa94056ef0bb61
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Not sure what you're saying here. The block rate can't be particularly
> increased or decreased in the long run due to the work difficulty
> adjustment getting you roughly back where you started no matter what.
> Someone could DOS the system by producing empty blocks, sure, that's a
> central attack of what can happen when someone does a 51% attack with no
> special countermeasures other than everything that Bitcoin does at its
> core. An attacker or group of attackers could conspire to reduce block
> sizes in order to increase transaction fees, in fact they could do that
> with a miner activated soft fork. That appears both doable and given past
> things which have happened with transaction fees in the past potentially
> lucrative, particularly as block rewards fall in the future. Please don't
> tell the big mining pools about it.
>
Bram, actually I thought the previous discussions determined that less than
51% hashrate would be required for certain soft-hard-forks employing empty
blocks?
I don't have a specific reference:
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012377.html
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012457.html
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-December/013332.html
- Bryan
http://heybryan.org/
1 512 203 0507
--00000000000022fa94056ef0bb61
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 3:40 PM, Bram Cohen via bitco=
in-dev <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfound=
ation.org" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>><=
/span> wrote:<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote=
"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:=
1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">Not sure what you're =
saying here. The block rate can't be particularly increased or decrease=
d in the long run due to the work difficulty adjustment getting you roughly=
back where you started no matter what. Someone could DOS the system by pro=
ducing empty blocks, sure, that's a central attack of what can happen w=
hen someone does a 51% attack with no special countermeasures other than ev=
erything that Bitcoin does at its core. An attacker or group of attackers c=
ould conspire to reduce block sizes in order to increase transaction fees, =
in fact they could do that with a miner activated soft fork. That appears b=
oth doable and given past things which have happened with transaction fees =
in the past potentially lucrative, particularly as block rewards fall in th=
e future. Please don't tell the big mining pools about it.</div></block=
quote></div><span style=3D"font-size:small;background-color:rgb(255,255,255=
);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;di=
splay:inline"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><span style=3D"font-size:small;bac=
kground-color:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoratio=
n-color:initial;float:none;display:inline"><br></span></div>Bram, actually =
I thought the previous discussions determined that less than 51% hashrate w=
ould be required for certain soft-hard-forks employing empty blocks?</span>=
<br style=3D"font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-=
color:initial"><br style=3D"font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;t=
ext-decoration-color:initial"><span style=3D"font-size:small;background-col=
or:rgb(255,255,255);text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:ini=
tial;float:none;display:inline">I don't have a specific reference:</spa=
n><div style=3D"font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decorati=
on-color:initial"><a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bi=
tcoin-dev/2016-February/012377.html">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipe=
rmail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012377.html</a><br><a href=3D"https://lists=
.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012457.html">https=
://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2016-February/012457.htm=
l</a><br><a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev=
/2016-December/013332.html">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bit=
coin-dev/2016-December/013332.html</a><br></div><div class=3D"gmail_extra">=
<br></div><div class=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature"=
>- Bryan<br><a href=3D"http://heybryan.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://heybr=
yan.org/</a><br>1 512 203 0507</div>
</div></div>
--00000000000022fa94056ef0bb61--
|
