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
|
Return-Path: <joachimstr@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A026C4E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 07:20:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-40136.protonmail.ch (mail-40136.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.136])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6EEB08BF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 15 Oct 2019 07:20:12 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 07:20:07 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=default; t=1571124010;
bh=flwwwS5T6cW5WSZ4duswZDqTH5gkAEVIqG/xYPCiydY=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID:
From;
b=aBtahUyylF3gMYknVdXUyhJYiBA3cAWwNMylM99IRtR8O5mfgSLlMAIwtBbvGH63o
f8xocaF14HEotE3aEAkpRj+GpZdGXESW8t2jb6369xln6VA/4rI8a0Dgb5+Ne67WpK
1HDMdGQz3SG30uh2vrz2djOrDoDsLBQfRrPhDEbY=
To: Braydon Fuller <braydon@purse.io>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: =?UTF-8?Q?Joachim_Str=C3=B6mbergson?= <joachimstr@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: =?UTF-8?Q?Joachim_Str=C3=B6mbergson?= <joachimstr@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <yKuDn4LKCA9-olIsgnJO7VqN3RE9BgZWEzLu6-k4wG30iHYDIJa6wjTBoYXU0zWCRyNCEvBb4xQw7qp0BDGBCR4zccI6kJ_4AnlsB9vc9L4=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <93649df9-27ab-abaf-00f3-da6c528344cc@purse.io>
References: <42cd5ffd-63e8-b738-c4ea-13d0699b1268@purse.io>
<CAE-z3OV_LL+Jww3e=gO6t=02VW7m9PK+8EaYoEVLy9NKNMiSaQ@mail.gmail.com>
<e9c5e519-ea8a-f0e2-d8fb-c955b5c2de40@purse.io>
<CAE-z3OXyTc0aoJJVNLS5MReE7+Nhckyrjf22+yCSjXF8=bNbXQ@mail.gmail.com>
<H_Yq1W3SffFweLPPXiUiA4EeU2yU7c8LVcqw5AbajovWTWMt5hKQARKglEQwCjPpXvjiBfvmTnaXJwivkGkT8BDha8k303DNbFB-ECes0d4=@protonmail.com>
<93649df9-27ab-abaf-00f3-da6c528344cc@purse.io>
Feedback-ID: rtGq1wInl4cYyZOA2iZwaHP-4FBFY67Qt3DcVBMZh8YR1tV-3hijnv7SxpdDwGlNdSPgHEykKLn6PcHDKa0D8A==:Ext:ProtonMail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM,
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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 15:54:56 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Chain width expansion
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: Tue, 15 Oct 2019 07:20:13 -0000
> > [...] First you provide proof of your best block height via coinbase [.=
..]
>
> So I don't think you can use the height in the coinbase for that
> purpose, as it's not possible to validate it without the previous
> headers. That's common for more than just the height.
You can fake it of course, but it means you are spending money for PoW and =
I can't see viable attack here. You can commit to either lower height than =
actual or higher height, if you are malicious. If it is lower, then your ch=
ain will look weaker with some heuristic based on PoW of the tip and the ch=
ain length. So you are not going to do that. It thus seem it only makes sen=
se to commit to higher than actual height. OK, this could convince me to be=
interested in your chain over others. So let's say the real chain is 600k =
blocks, you claim 1m blocks, and you prove 1m height block to me. So I can =
ask you about
1) 2000 headers from the tip down
2) AND another proof of height for the block at 1m-2000.
To be able to provide that you need to have such a chain and you can reuse =
any real subchain from mainnet. It's still possible that you can deliver th=
at, but not for high difficulty.
Now if time warp attack is blocked, you will have pretty hard time to creat=
e such a chain that would look strongest in cumulative work. I don't have a=
ctual numbers though, so I can't say this would mitigate everything.
> > [...] to generate much longer chain with superslow timestamp increase (=
~5 blocks in 1 second) without increasing difficulty (i.e. staying at min. =
diff.). [...]
>
> In that case, it would take about 7 minutes of block time seconds for
> the next retarget period, every 2016 blocks, and the difficulty would
> adjust. The difficulty would adjust in that case as if 2 weeks of blocks
> had been mined in 7 minutes. For the difficulty to remain the same the
> time between blocks needs to be 10 minutes.
This calculation does not apply under time warp attack. You can fake timest=
amps of all blocks except for those relevant to the retarget calculation. T=
hose are only the first and the last block in the 2016 block window.
|
