summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/e5/68c95e92e23857dec9148c420a95aea463c3db
blob: 3cfef4ff2ef1bf8dc00f74fd8d3449c3aea02667 (plain)
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
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1Y0rN2-0007Yq-3b
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:36:56 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
	designates 62.13.149.101 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=62.13.149.101; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
	helo=outmail149101.authsmtp.com; 
Received: from outmail149101.authsmtp.com ([62.13.149.101])
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	id 1Y0rN0-0004Jy-8v for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:36:56 +0000
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
	by punt15.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id sBGCalOj014093;
	Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:36:47 GMT
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
	[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
	by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id sBGCagYl087110
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
	Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:36:45 GMT
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 07:36:42 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Alex Mizrahi <alex.mizrahi@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20141216123642.GA19943@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <54876653.4020403@certimix.com> <548769FA.5040406@bluematt.me>
	<CA+s+GJAe9MeO+Sr0+2BRwu3q-Be5JQt_s_xdnBBEcquXqOyxcA@mail.gmail.com>
	<417518B4-1E4D-4467-BC87-95C9EAF0C599@bitsofproof.com>
	<54880492.9060300@intersango.com>
	<CAE28kUQ1tzCXp=90-1ZQG67f2Vh3uCrApJTbx+Lf1r-1byV4Lw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAE28kUQ1tzCXp=90-1ZQG67f2Vh3uCrApJTbx+Lf1r-1byV4Lw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 32452cd9-8520-11e4-9f74-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
	http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
	aQdMdwQUHFAXAgsB AmIbWlZeU1t7XWY7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
	VklWR1pVCwQmQm52 dU9JO0VyfwJHeX4+ ZENhVnQVX0Z+cEQu
	FkdJHWgEZXphaTUb TUkOcAdJcANIexZF O1F8UScOLwdSbGoL
	NQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpY RgYVKF8UXXNDOzMm SB0OVTAuG0wDSG06
	ZwcnJlNUF0YYM0N6 Llo9WRoAKRgVBEVZ ESMFCjJDIREGQWIz
	BBlXW1JWGz1UQCE0 
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
	anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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
X-Headers-End: 1Y0rN0-0004Jy-8v
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Merged mining a side chain with proof of
 burn on parent chain
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: Tue, 16 Dec 2014 12:36:56 -0000


--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 11:55:50AM +0200, Alex Mizrahi wrote:
> Usually at this point people say "we assume that miners aren't going to
> collude, otherwise even Bitcoin is not secure".
> Well, this is BS. The fact that a pool can acquire more than 50% of total
> hashpower was successfully demonstrated by ghash.io.
> But the thing is, Bitcoin doesn't offer one a good way to attack the whol=
e,
> as there are powerful factors which will work against the attacker.
> But this is not the case with sidechains (or any merged-mined chains, for
> that matter).
> And once you have a clear incentive, collusion is much more likely.

+1

It's notable that blockstream hasn't published much if anything concrete
on what exactly you'd use merge-mined sidechains for; they're even worse
than Ethereum in that regard.

> > Proof of Burn is a real cost for following the rules.
> >
>=20
>  So what? As long as cost is less than revenue, it is OK.

It's even better than that: if an attack does happen, the participants
in the consensus system have an incentive to defend against it to
maintain the value of their tokens. Proof-of-burn allows that defense to
be in response to a threat, and essentially unlimited in size.

So now any attacker knows that if they launch an attack in theory the
response could be as strong as the value of the system itself.

This can be improved upon with systems that allow the tokens to be
burned, "internal" proof-of-burn. This suffers from "nothing-at-stake"
vulnerabilities to an extent, OTOH within the context of the system it
is a true sacrifice of value; probably not a big deal in a zookeyv-style
block-DAG where multiple lines of history can be combined. Here the
incentives of the defenders are even more strongly tipped towards
burning their value to preserve the system, not unlike
replace-by-fee-scorched-earth thinking.

--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
00000000000000000e0c078667795abe21bfdebb913eba60cc7a625c732f0a89

--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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==
=Ka3f
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--0OAP2g/MAC+5xKAE--