Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 951F0B9E for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:17:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37FADFE for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:17:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ishibashi.lan (adsl-98-70-226-244.gnv.bellsouth.net [98.70.226.244]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F97B38A0D6D; Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:17:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:190722:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::W0aaqv9a3/dFeSAb:aOczJ X-Hashcash: 1:25:190722:dizzle@pointbiz.com::E/HpCF8MLGI0ixGT:FYqx From: Luke Dashjr To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org, Peter Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:17:29 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.10 References: In-Reply-To: X-KMail-QuotePrefix: > MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <201907222117.30564.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED 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: Wed, 24 Jul 2019 11:36:19 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Core to disable Bloom-based Filtering by default X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2019 21:17:52 -0000 On Monday 22 July 2019 18:52:10 Peter via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Privacy is a matter of individual choice in the current protocol. Why not > let people provide this network service? I don't see why it should be > end-of-life if it provides value. It's not EOL, just disabled by default. Anyone can provide it by choice. Same as with Stratum/Electrum right now (except easier to enable). > I believe there's a network security obtained by having a large quantity of > people following the Bitcoin headers based on longest weighted chain. As a > means of nullifying potential miner initiated hard forks (like S2X). This is incorrect. Such wallets strictly degrade security, as they are blindly trusting miners. They make the network more VULNERABLE to 2X-like attacks. Luke