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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1UsErl-0006GW-4n
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:16:13 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
designates 74.125.82.43 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.43; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
helo=mail-wg0-f43.google.com;
Received: from mail-wg0-f43.google.com ([74.125.82.43])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1UsErj-0004Wz-B4
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:16:13 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f43.google.com with SMTP id z11so753011wgg.22
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 27 Jun 2013 09:16:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=google.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state;
bh=2QSwoKsYOpnk+LqxXmS998s6SWmACRkCx8qNlPAlOFk=;
b=WgKQU/R7oDXAbasQEYboMHiaExdKlJkxZjGP+mGkLDwFeGUBhLVOATC50PWAssZuvn
mvB01qajon7GH9p48nRV5joH/7icEkFkSh40za6BLoiHZbDGq3hA/3L/WJOrPbuAsTtj
FsI5PRviTZrPuDsGyWWbsTRpdHDg2buanuFrqNc7uW05HPvFJE/tycQxWGEqv8JVE13Z
amypKxZJO1ghZaNLABDRKok2ggm2HSapD1m6Mu2h/egRS1l39EqNdgT3gR2SC8VXv8Ak
HHcLr677q+yiXyqsUZiOYeq1wx2F6J3zCVhcZ1enMQXLp5Icv7OpXJMpPZYTE19Pzhgs
HWTw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.102.37 with SMTP id fl5mr16350557wib.52.1372349764936;
Thu, 27 Jun 2013 09:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.194.178.69 with HTTP; Thu, 27 Jun 2013 09:16:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <51CC6259.3060003@inf.ethz.ch>
References: <51CC12A6.3090100@inf.ethz.ch>
<CAAS2fgRg8B_j=Luf31R8-+vqOWQOUcUDof8wdq79_Ar9YuUm9g@mail.gmail.com>
<51CC6259.3060003@inf.ethz.ch>
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 12:16:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0MVrQN6hyuAsYNRJ2CV6fsPnAbRDSUQH+n6jfKdMiFaLQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
To: Arthur Gervais <arthur.gervais@inf.ethz.ch>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlITpJQZH1BhsMcbqkKV/veUgeVU/bVHvUwy+IMgT787iE/GyKxaiW1PCSydU5pd4y2EjvY
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1UsErj-0004Wz-B4
Cc: Ghassan Karame <ghassan@karame.org>,
bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net,
Hubert Ritzdorf <rihubert@inf.ethz.ch>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Double-Spending Fast Payments in Bitcoin
due to Client versions 0.8.1
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: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 16:16:13 -0000
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Arthur Gervais
<arthur.gervais@inf.ethz.ch> wrote:
> Our only intention is to raise the awareness for merchants who have to
> accept zero-confirmation transactions. They should be aware of the
> signature encoding difference between Bitcoin versions and the possible
> consequences.
Certainly. Though given current P2P network node version
distributions, it is increasing difficult to relay the older version
of transaction, and will only become more so in the future.
It also remains the case that merchants who accept zero confirmation
transactions are likely already aware of the risk level, and make a
business decision. One can see tiny digital downloads often at zero
confirmation, but rarely a Porsche or house or bitcoin exchange
deposit.
--
Jeff Garzik
Senior Software Engineer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
|
