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
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBB20FA2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 6 Feb 2016 21:24:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148114.authsmtp.net (outmail148114.authsmtp.net
[62.13.148.114])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0300711C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 6 Feb 2016 21:24:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247])
by punt20.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u16LOS44053994;
Sat, 6 Feb 2016 21:24:28 GMT
Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com
[52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u16LOPG7045645
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Sat, 6 Feb 2016 21:24:26 GMT
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 94E5C40092;
Sat, 6 Feb 2016 21:21:11 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 6 Feb 2016 16:24:19 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <20160206212419.GA23969@muck>
References: <CABsx9T1Bd0-aQg-9uRa4u3dGA5fKxaj8-mEkxVzX8mhdj4Gt2g@mail.gmail.com>
<201602060012.26728.luke@dashjr.org>
<CABm2gDrns0+eZdLyNk=tDNbnMsC1tT1MfEY93cJf1V_8TPjmLA@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T2LuMZciXpMiY24+rPzhj1VT6j=HJ5STtnQmnfnA_XFUw@mail.gmail.com>
<CALqxMTGu1EtVxRYTxLBpE-0zWH59dnQa1zst9p9vdmbCckBjtQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T2AUwDdz3JowpQYeusDgCBwfNFCDz0Kfut9ffT6gSaGeQ@mail.gmail.com>
<20160206211158.GA14053@muck>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160206211158.GA14053@muck>
X-Server-Quench: ffb47c4f-cd17-11e5-bcde-0015176ca198
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdgQUHlAWAgsB AmAbWVVeUll7W2U7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
T0pMXVMcUQRufWNh cRkeVhx0cwAIfn9w Zwg0CCJfWxd+I1su
Fk9TCGwHMGJ9OjNL BV1YdwJRcQRMLU5E Y1gxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
GA41ejw8IwAXAgVt ChkXKkoVWk8PTHYd QRsYEDw0EAUPQyI4
LFQ9K0wRVEIQN0Qu eUcmEQh6exofBQRU Dl1AG0cA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Increase block size limit to 2
megabytes
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: Sat, 06 Feb 2016 21:24:30 -0000
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 06, 2016 at 12:45:14PM -0500, Gavin Andresen via bitcoin-dev =
wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 12:01 PM, Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org> wrote:
> >=20
> > >
> > > It would probably be a good idea to have a security considerations
> > > section
> >=20
> >=20
> > Containing what? I'm not aware of any security considerations that are=
any
> > different from any other consensus rules change.
>=20
> I covered the security considerations unique to hard-forks on my blog:
>=20
> https://petertodd.org/2016/soft-forks-are-safer-than-hard-forks
Oh, and to be 100% clear, I should say those are only *some of* the
unique security considerations - for starters the article is mainly
talking about uncontroversial hard-forks, and doesn't even delve into
economic attacks among other omissions. It's just an introductory
article.
--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000008320874843f282f554aa2436290642fcfa81e5a01d78698
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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==
=1i1w
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nFreZHaLTZJo0R7j--
|
