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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1TRkzI-0008Bx-RP
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:34:16 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.210.175 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.210.175; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ia0-f175.google.com;
Received: from mail-ia0-f175.google.com ([209.85.210.175])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1TRkzD-0000IA-JZ
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:34:16 +0000
Received: by mail-ia0-f175.google.com with SMTP id b35so2397148iac.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 26 Oct 2012 07:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.15.226 with SMTP id a2mr2445857igd.5.1351262046347; Fri, 26
Oct 2012 07:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.64.171.73 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Oct 2012 07:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP0=+L8HC4uVuwe5qc5CirUAUPWz18d08AebPcLpkv7Z8g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP0XALwBFJyZTzYd5xBp4MRrjv0s_y2tOXbO7UgjWF2HzA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgScydOWz_eqnhWxQNVUOtzvSBwkj7tttP3_DLdW+=3CTQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2sBZL=UYAxtjU2Su13Z12wB7s04LxmcyUR2hH51tcN9g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgSPk8QgYq2zcV+G2GoQyo5AfnRj4=+sURr34KZakhqazQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP0=+L8HC4uVuwe5qc5CirUAUPWz18d08AebPcLpkv7Z8g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:34:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSveRa90yV=e+neB53pz-r+ThJvQhAjSf+u9K+cCJwABA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-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
0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1TRkzD-0000IA-JZ
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Draft BIP for Bloom filtering
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: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 14:34:17 -0000
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> Anyway, it's trivial to DoS the entire Bitcoin network today. It
> hasn't ever happened. Maybe one day it will, but the only rationale
> people can come up with for such an attack beyond random griefing is
Which happens and is a concern. Altcoins have been attacked on things
we fixed. For example, litecoin nodes were being run out of disk space
through addr.dat flooding.
I think we've been generally fortunate that the level of griefing is
low (though not non-existent). But part of the reason its been low is
that it's probably harder to DOS attack bitcoin than you believe. In
the reference client a lot of work has gone in to removing attacks
with sublinear cost for the attackers.
That people aren't attacking much now is not an argument to accept a
new vulnerability much less a _normative_ vulnerability in the
protocol.
That it's no big deal even attacked would be a fine argument to me, so
I'll go try to convince myself of that.
> governments,
Please don't put that kind of black helicopter junk in my mouth. I
agree with you the point that these aren't a source of concern for me.
|
