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
|
Return-Path: <tomh@thinlink.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A11F3B5A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:05:16 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pf0-f172.google.com (mail-pf0-f172.google.com
[209.85.192.172])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9F541DF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:05:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pf0-f172.google.com with SMTP id x63so20225491pfx.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:05:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=thinlink-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version
:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=tEETae2t8ar55jE+YPzpPZfOD01mLpqstfx+6WPalPU=;
b=uD9IYo5qhHTc/dEvFWPAj95kgpY0vn9xzHQeMeYcCxHyy8WCcs5JKBzj73stpdmPvG
Ux1yoY8RDirh7HFzj0K/3RVjroeMIkAvgagM7UWEY6Dsh1MQhUjAboZbj8+3ULfUIzu3
kxw8jhKV5YaoTeAMrbuGM+qcVS3BZfPYnoAch4jBL8HxFH6ZD6zXimC2ow+i1QhWJt26
XcJQkq0j6yveprwVImSqsZl8lYHBH3CdEcGNEzdBKisIfMcfVGrTKg1qf+3lPXlQ1O6S
Dpwa3DjxRxmaZnQrZAKg3BK6wS0KU5bD+I72DtjWC2d0aifq0H5uiD9yCOH475NjJdpQ
6XwQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date
:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=tEETae2t8ar55jE+YPzpPZfOD01mLpqstfx+6WPalPU=;
b=BA6q1HASbCtYe+Sr30QhBQYBj17XDD3xaNIfryTugMgFtseXeeN5uDzw9UYOxb0ge6
S+dBnwWwsuxEojL0KDL1dKCD3/G6kGC0OdydnPRLOu6t0xP3tZSuAURp27Hhh0jMC2FW
Y2Rwah4buB2PbmPklE5OWkwn1EKJbKefkcgLbX0KzJHBZZVZRdO4pHttz1tv8MSsTdFt
qNyIzcnWa4YZ1+tplaaOTNaKi/L3X8uHZCvfnOFlxcRMurmJpDN/ZZhBcbzwcJ/t++ah
nvyYvwFxla5LYzXrtwi1/8KXdw8jVvMMv4iw4v3BtpXeYXRXTPIfZ/+2v0rZD4CjnBfL
HjeA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H0gVkW63yKsznLTgV3XMVrVpA4YajInNTZN8exTqnYLu48QK7zLzCVshfxFhxtghjuF
X-Received: by 10.99.95.5 with SMTP id t5mr10632158pgb.27.1489676712964;
Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:05:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.89] (99-8-65-117.lightspeed.davlca.sbcglobal.net.
[99.8.65.117]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id
m67sm11242181pfj.32.2017.03.16.08.05.11
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:05:11 -0700 (PDT)
To: bfd@cock.lu,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
References: <71d822e413ac457a530e1c367811cc24@cock.lu>
<77b6dd25-0603-a0bd-6a9e-38098e5cb19d@jonasschnelli.ch>
<74aeb4760316b59a3db56c0d16d11f28@cock.lu>
<CACq0ZD7XT_h8ADptKA0uBT7617fvvgh3uGndkc08RZUSQM2yQg@mail.gmail.com>
<f335731c-3928-6694-5ed8-aa1999b401f1@jonasschnelli.ch>
<CAAcC9ysdaK1DqBBRvBM=7uHFnM7WW23R61v68xrAMj3rWJfqdg@mail.gmail.com>
<045843cb19f03888da10d2954cd1c685@cock.lu>
<7794520b-43a0-3227-1a68-58d12e432291@thinlink.com>
<48d3940ab1a2bd53c6e056ce7fbcd361@cock.lu>
From: Tom Harding <tomh@thinlink.com>
Message-ID: <666037d7-9fd9-ad10-229d-9fbaec530538@thinlink.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 08:05:11 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/45.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <48d3940ab1a2bd53c6e056ce7fbcd361@cock.lu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:12:37 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet
performance and SPV security
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: Thu, 16 Mar 2017 15:05:16 -0000
On 3/15/2017 5:25 PM, bfd@cock.lu wrote:
> compact fraud proofs in Bitcoin aren't possible
> In the white paper SPV clients have the same security as fully
> validating nodes
In addition to not existing, if compact fraud proofs did exist, trying
to ensure they are seen by SPV clients has the same problems as BIP37.
> in the implementation of BIP37 they have absolutely no security except
> the vague hope that they are not being lied to, and that the chain
> with the most work they are seeing is actually valid, both are very
> weak assumptions.
Since real money is involved, the near total absence of documented fraud
along these lines belies the strong language.
> During the validationless mining failure around the BIP66 activation
> miners produced 6 invalid blocks in a chain, and many more invalid
> blocks in isolated bursts for a period lasting several months. Due to
> the instability of the network you are completely unreasonable to
> accept anything except multiple confirmations
This affected all users, not just SPV.
|
