Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.216.182 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.216.182; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-qy0-f182.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <201109271608.07053.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <201109261517.11245.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CABsx9T1gfuiHj9aR=1gDxtEqJzov5iXRqVEiEBUx-VBcearAZQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<201109271608.07053.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:23:47 -0400
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTG43u3i=aQoFZPgFgTLh1peJiomnvXjcPeV3p5zEFsQg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Newly introduced DoS
Precedence: list

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 4:08 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> Is it certain that it cannot be triggered by a peer having some huge number
> more blocks than you?

Might be better to have a global flag that indicates when the node
thinks its current with the network (this could have other UI impacts,
like letting the user know if they send and their connectivity looks
non-current), and only enforce this check when the node believes that
its current.

Currency could be
=height>last_checkpoint&&top_timestamp>now()-safe_amount;  with
safe_amount to be high enough that it's very unlikely to be falsely
triggered by an improbably long gap.