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
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
|
Return-Path: <dave@dtrt.org>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03341C000B;
Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:38:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF62B4025C;
Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:38:34 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.234
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.234 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_SBL_CSS=3.335,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dtrt.org
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 2cTYvQwsnQjy; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:38:33 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from newmail.dtrt.org (newmail.dtrt.org
[IPv6:2600:3c03::f03c:91ff:fe7b:78d1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CF4140217;
Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:38:33 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dtrt.org;
s=20201208; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:
Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:
Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc
:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:
List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
bh=bPIF4IUllPsKJbp6HSlkUi0gaAQmV2COFZOA33FakrA=; b=o3UiDVDRI3xi+0v0w+BV3tpnSh
Hz3Sbf2mefJBuAqF6CWhgWRN5cm4+oYzYYDlvgzwl1YRpKz0wAV7R0ZRcOlL3Kfo5vHT8+i2u9zmP
79FYnvATIqh5Pg/U2Qx/gwoMukZbgKsIZnP61/Jmva8tQCxqDCbN8GI9CsoNlaahgyjc=;
Received: from harding by newmail.dtrt.org with local (Exim 4.92)
(envelope-from <dave@dtrt.org>)
id 1lubB9-0007iF-IZ; Sat, 19 Jun 2021 03:38:31 -1000
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 03:36:53 -1000
From: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>
To: Antoine Riard <antoine.riard@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20210619133653.m2272jgna5geuuki@ganymede>
References: <CALZpt+FF_TT_K3wjWhhaDE6Ue=RAsM2JWO7-mYjm5LtHqJvNmg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="rzkc565rjzyfsifh"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALZpt+FF_TT_K3wjWhhaDE6Ue=RAsM2JWO7-mYjm5LtHqJvNmg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
"lightning-dev\\\\@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
<lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] Waiting SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT and
Packing Packages
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2021 13:38:35 -0000
--rzkc565rjzyfsifh
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 06:11:38PM -0400, Antoine Riard wrote:
> 2) Solving the Pre-Signed Feerate problem : Package-Relay or
> SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT
>=20
> For Lightning, either package-relay or SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT should be able =
to
> solve the pre-signed feerate issue [3]
>
> [...]
>
> [3] I don't think there is a clear discussion on how SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT
> solves pinnings beyond those LN meetings logs:
> https://gnusha.org/lightning-dev/2020-06-08.log
For anyone else looking, the most relevant line seems to be:
13:50 < BlueMatt> (sidenote: sighash_no_input is *really* elegant here
- assuming a lot of complicated logic in core to do so, you could
imagine blind-cpfp-bumping *any* commitment tx without knowing its
there or which one it is all with one tx.......in theory)
That might work for current LN-penalty, but I'm not sure it works for
eltoo. If Bitcoin Core can rewrite the blind CPFP fee bump transaction
to refer to any prevout, that implies anyone else can do the same.
Miners who were aware of two or more states from an eltoo channel would
be incentivized to rewrite to the oldest state, giving them fee revenue
now and ensuring fee revenue in the future when a later state update is
broadcast.
If the attacker using pinning is able to reuse their attack at no cost,
they can re-pin the channel again and force the honest user to pay
another anyprevout bounty to miners. Repeat this a bunch of times and
the honest user has now spent more on fees than their balance from the
closed channel.
Even if my analysis above is wrong, I would encourage you or Matt or
someone to write up this anyprevout idea in more detail and distribute
it before you promote it much more.
> package-relay sounds a reasonable, temporary "patch".
Even if every protocol based on presigned transactions can magically
allow dynamically adding inputs and modifying outputs for fees, and we
also have a magic perfect transaction replacement protocol, package
relay is still fundamentally useful for CPFP fee bumping very low
feerate transactions received from an external party. E.g. Alice pays
Bob, mempool min feerates increase and Alice's transaction is dropped,
Bob still wants the money, so he submits a package with Alice's
transaction plus his own high feerate spend of it.
Package relay is a clear improvement now, and one I expect to be
permanent for as long as we're using anything like the current protocol.
=20
> # Deployment timeline
>=20
> So what I believe as a rough deployment timeline.
I don't think it's appropriate to be creating timelines like this that
depend on the work of a large number of contributors who I don't believe
you've consulted. For details on this point of view, please see
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2017-July/014726.ht=
ml
Stuff will get done when it gets done.
-Dave
--rzkc565rjzyfsifh
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEgxUkqkMp0LnoXjCr2dtBqWwiadMFAmDN8vUACgkQ2dtBqWwi
adMBXg//dk/8r3qubbw1Un64QAH7uk6SrY+F0HAuz5P1ddYOqhrI5DXVYtoVBCz7
mB60+hBRKFh/pFy1znVYehBD31wGj80KnIsGvkqlj1gcKg2SK1iGqTjejogvbF6h
9Au83yQWoaTtiK5AHYxuTk1Tjy0jV0tWkZjNQUjv/nI41Q27MR3v67B43VxUDImT
s7LENIkWmVK+xnewa3No461jG6apVkTp3iRGVXtsnwGCbHwEmZ0+3KZ5cMamCaOY
xeeVH1VT85I3ZFRyEo/stUd7t7jp5cLzsmFNmaAPrmzxEg2+wMzYDUf+Df08+nnS
MHryfHw9nJhgEq9U4Opcq4IpRoulplUTblM4ZOtf3hqEASDZQFg0DKzOp1Poeh22
jnGXZYYiQRcTgjEM80DH1GPv5R7T2//60YVYyB5SNx1YvjMuiTq4cC5Cg/4R/J9C
Ghtxy4Wp3KnBgXtuAhI2vjVxJJg+pF0MjM+xce5A4qgVv+lNKmo+h9UgCC1bSbRh
g231lJFkbh0SvbmVd9ynZCZYqDweLrm0A02jVh00y+mkrDHEbMctgDzY9h6e7C6S
arwHBtog7Y5n7VoHBrHmmWTX3TPAut1BNFasAmJW6DVn6WbPDvLocIEbzq26hVB/
6/Wt0p/Ul2dpL5dCbSb62ew4NGsERl2Di/Ezcbiz38jyeymkNiU=
=LTcF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--rzkc565rjzyfsifh--
|
