Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07195E0C for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 21:01:37 +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 63EA510C for ; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 21:01:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:5:265:61b6:56a6:b03d:28d6]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA32138A910E; Sun, 7 Feb 2016 21:01:15 +0000 (UTC) X-Hashcash: 1:25:160207:gavinandresen@gmail.com::diaqhPBJY8a+ex=2:afPZH X-Hashcash: 1:25:160207:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::vOxzvOmtRgV78xPg:Q8F3 X-Hashcash: 1:25:160207:tomz@freedommail.ch::OiqG1dIykkpIGyZf:tLrj From: Luke Dashjr To: Gavin Andresen Date: Sun, 7 Feb 2016 21:01:13 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/4.1.13-gentoo; KDE/4.14.8; x86_64; ; ) References: <201602062046.40193.luke@dashjr.org> In-Reply-To: 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: <201602072101.15142.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_SBL, RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Increase block size limit to 2 megabytes X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 21:01:37 -0000 On Sunday, February 07, 2016 2:16:02 PM Gavin Andresen wrote: > On Sat, Feb 6, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Saturday, February 06, 2016 5:25:21 PM Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > > If you have a node that is "old" your node will stop getting new > > > blocks. The node will essentially just say "x-hours behind" with "x" > > > getting larger every hour. Funds don't get confirmed. etc. > > > > Until someone decides to attack you. Then you'll get 6, 10, maybe more > > blocks confirming a large 10000 BTC payment. If you're just a normal end > > user (or perhaps an automated system), you'll figure that payment is good > > and irreversibly hand over the title to the house. > > There will be approximately zero percentage of hash power left on the > weaker branch of the fork, based on past soft-fork adoption by miners (they > upgrade VERY quickly from 75% to over 95%). I'm assuming there are literally ZERO miners left on the weaker branch. The attacker in this scenario simply rents hashing for a few days in advance to build his fake chain, then broadcasts the blocks to the unsuspecting merchant at ~10 block intervals so it looks like everything is working normal again. There are lots of mining rental services out there, and miners quite often do not care to avoid selling hashrate to the highest bidder regardless of what they're mining. 10 blocks worth costs a little more than 250 BTC - soon, that will be 125 BTC. Luke