Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE50D9C for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 05:46:30 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-pg0-f47.google.com (mail-pg0-f47.google.com [74.125.83.47]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA3B7D0 for ; Thu, 6 Apr 2017 05:46:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg0-f47.google.com with SMTP id 21so25815043pgg.1 for ; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 22:46:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GgJpBLQ3BQ214V+wUvO1LsQMRgpydYlveOoMJTeaN5g=; b=Uaaug7MNaVaul824k90rIIEhiuiOYW3m60iTwPOzf6js1zWrUww22IBCo4EJR/HnWt gvoLVfkFgrFRpZ8zs81l+m5Q3MNnLUADx/zrzkF8cBPxSw+j8GOBdMZZfJduZxp6QYfe hfu7bzCHOvofCWl56NJW8v2+JSNhykfBy0c3pb3kIGrBaG8ZOhK8Iq8Xb6iEJS2eOLMj JtYQrH1jCx2uNTZZ0X2sUjDqrsR8aWK71SjhmtnZUf7Iv2Pmn2NEKk4wumZePpZxKDOY Hom/M1wL8xtU/jf7UdEiFKIdoa1ObFmc+38EmrZ5ZLogd/AjUFJqOUzFuXY4Mwzck4Ag ASjw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=GgJpBLQ3BQ214V+wUvO1LsQMRgpydYlveOoMJTeaN5g=; b=ZWWdubdkUs55X++fiamad+hSNjJEj2Je0BGz5u2npoxc6iOWjC8f6xd/2jpQ9LLu5n xsHqKvkYrdQWveHChliuZG5BSucHnD4eIn3QP/ITrL9W146eNPmXu7rFXVsVPbExeK8V 4pDgj2HCMS1jQ9tY0++LN91W3HWJ3TeRHsQB0nq/BlEsQziY8hgDrAkJIk9qeGybCAB6 3BwJZ+J+3R0aSduGb2gSfyTJDszJ96Eb4o+9PS6moBvSpAhCRiBWKpfaNboyLNUXwILl DKIzeJuJZdP5eNFnLzobf9aq1uO+Z3PB2W1vXlMHxhG0pAmBvBfNdDXwRKgzzTVX1TV9 j9rw== X-Gm-Message-State: AFeK/H3B+9IMC1HOPYXs27Th9HpBG7f0Q6s3sznURNH/svFXul4NXWXTA7PG9+1V27f8Ew== X-Received: by 10.84.141.36 with SMTP id 33mr41193164plu.81.1491457590173; Wed, 05 Apr 2017 22:46:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.0.0.120] (107-202-144-143.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net. [107.202.144.143]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 11sm1069963pgf.28.2017.04.05.22.46.29 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 05 Apr 2017 22:46:29 -0700 (PDT) To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org References: <20170406023123.GA1071@savin.petertodd.org> <20170406024910.GA1271@savin.petertodd.org> From: Thomas Daede Message-ID: Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 22:46:27 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM, HK_RANDOM_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 11:42:53 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Inhibiting a covert attack on the Bitcoin POW function 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: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 05:46:31 -0000 On 04/05/2017 08:23 PM, David Vorick via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I have a practical concern related to the amount of activation energy > required to get something like this through. We are talking about > implementing something that would remove tens to hundreds of millions of > dollars of mining revenue for miners who have already gambled that this > income would be available to them. The proposed BIP only removes covert ASICBOOST. As long as the ASICs can also do the non-covert ASICBOOST, it shouldn't have any impact on miner revenue.