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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1VxnuS-00088R-8l
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 31 Dec 2013 01:14:16 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1VxnuR-0002j8-5c for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 31 Dec 2013 01:14:16 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D6E4210813F2;
Tue, 31 Dec 2013 01:14:25 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 01:14:05 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.6-gentoo; KDE/4.11.2; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAMkFLsSwKEiEtV1OaAsGPiU8iAWbb77fDNJDmRwbgKnZ_kjG6Q@mail.gmail.com>
<20131230232225.GA10594@tilt>
In-Reply-To: <20131230232225.GA10594@tilt>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201312310114.05600.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.1 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1VxnuR-0002j8-5c
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Looking for GREAT C++ developer for
exciting opportunity in bitcoin space
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, 31 Dec 2013 01:14:16 -0000
On Monday, December 30, 2013 11:22:25 PM Peter Todd wrote:
> that you are using merge-mining is a red-flag because without majority, or
> at least near-majority, hashing power an attacker can 51% attack your
> altcoin at negligible cost by re-using existing hashing power.
I strongly disagree on this isolated point. Using the same logic, Bitcoin is
vulnerable to an attacker at negligible cost by re-using existing hashing
power from mining Namecoin. Any non-scam altcoin is pretty safe using merged
mining, since any would-be attacker is going to have it in their interests to
invest in the altcoin instead of attacking it. It's only the scam ones that
want to pump & dump with no improvements, that are really at risk here.
The rational decision for a non-scam altcoin, is to take advantage of merged
mining to get as much security as possible. There are also some possible
tricks to get the full security of the bitcoin miners even when not all
participate in your altcoin (but this area probably needs some studying to get
right).
Luke
|
