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
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
|
Return-Path: <allen.piscitello@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CE141953
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 29 Sep 2015 18:23:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com (mail-io0-f180.google.com
[209.85.223.180])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7669AF5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 29 Sep 2015 18:23:57 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by iofh134 with SMTP id h134so20760914iof.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:23:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:cc:content-type;
bh=HZIfDpSVhVeoZnH8WC3AZd9dogDk1qqiqfg8qCV9TMg=;
b=k0py48UFEAjhnxEvHodkA0967Lgbf3w70LwCxcgAJvwmnvTwrS1eeZav6pfwhnnhiw
oRXnTK0+WblCZXKt3LlAF7NPWuTIormdRfmEY2brJQ949/6VZTAWNj2IqefVr6U9g5OP
MobtRnONuCJH/FP5FgreNc8us+Oa5vFp1V4d8+FCWyVg6fwHmGM/a/iemgQ0UGJ6VkNd
Hu6yBGfrHnIHGrLN9DOedsmuRxgJxfBqSS+JyVUYT0AysOiVrOxQuw6JaPg5JrQruuq+
zUCm+N0fMwA0zsz+IFDSxE2zWs7rWjgGGCkSlyHUwOwvzRPYn4U3ARS5yAaDwxikfs8B
eZMQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.40.12 with SMTP id o12mr169075ioo.84.1443551036801; Tue,
29 Sep 2015 11:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.79.69.135 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Sep 2015 11:23:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CABsx9T07DUjWoEmqmysya90Fxf4RkM7K18ZaP7pP3Hgk5rN-_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T2pDwNBrC-3w8vHeaLYZ6eoNTNU0gW741Y51YL9hU-kiA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJfRnm7gWmXUj=9Dh2o5sEXOMe6Y_4P=naY3cVt1gfLRKOpmnw@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T0YEm7mFYosRVbcG_XgtSi8BbUraGoixy4e2=nyCBeFaA@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJfRnm5=yrWE95T3+fzM_PxGxWJ38OnJMVxynTOKK1X9BTrgCg@mail.gmail.com>
<CA+w+GKTVzaEqWeR9m2ck6z3WZ_OWJ5hgkqyQhriJDLPVoHzfGQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAJfRnm4WwtNvChcCGCzDLJZrg3VZqJz-X-XXC0Ftyga3x=P8-w@mail.gmail.com>
<CABsx9T07DUjWoEmqmysya90Fxf4RkM7K18ZaP7pP3Hgk5rN-_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 13:23:56 -0500
Message-ID: <CAJfRnm4xNozyynxoTQS25FTCcOw_hwfFfV1V-mVfq+qZ+Q8jVQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Allen Piscitello <allen.piscitello@gmail.com>
To: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1141d150c387f50520e6ea17
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Is it possible for there to be two chains after a
hard fork?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Tue, 29 Sep 2015 18:23:58 -0000
--001a1141d150c387f50520e6ea17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>I started this thread as a sanity check on myself, because I keep seeing
smart people saying that two chains could persist for more than a few days
after a hard fork, and I still don't see how that would possibly work.
When you start with the assumption that anyone who disagrees with you is
insane or crazy, I can see why you have such difficulty.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:01 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
wrote:
> We really shouldn't have to go over "Bitcoin 101" on this mailing list,
> and this discussion should move to the not-yet-created more general
> discussion list. I started this thread as a sanity check on myself,
> because I keep seeing smart people saying that two chains could persist for
> more than a few days after a hard fork, and I still don't see how that
> would possibly work.
>
> So: "fraud" would be 51% miners sending you bitcoin in exchange for
> something of value, you wait for confirmations and send them that something
> of value, and then the 51% reverses the transaction.
>
> Running a full node doesn't help.
>
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Allen Piscitello <
> allen.piscitello@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >A dishonest miner majority can commit fraud against you, they can mine
>> only empty blocks, they can do various other things that render your money
>> worthless.
>>
>> Mining empty blocks is not fraud.
>>
>> If you want to use terms like "honest miners" and "fraud", please define
>> them so we can at least be on the same page.
>>
>> I am defining an honest miner as one that follows the rules of the
>> protocol. Obviously your definition is different.
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Mike Hearn <hearn@vinumeris.com> wrote:
>>
>>> >because Bitcoin's basic security assumption is that a supermajority of
>>>> miners are 'honest.'
>>>>
>>>> Only if you rely on SPV.
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, you rely on miners honesty even if you run a full node. This is in
>>> the white paper. A dishonest miner majority can commit fraud against you,
>>> they can mine only empty blocks, they can do various other things that
>>> render your money worthless.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> --
> Gavin Andresen
>
--001a1141d150c387f50520e6ea17
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px">I started this t=
hread as a sanity check on myself, because I keep seeing smart people sayin=
g that two chains could persist for more than a few days after a hard fork,=
and I still don't see how that would possibly work.</span></div><div><=
span style=3D"font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-s=
ize:12.8px">When you start with the assumption that anyone who disagrees wi=
th you is insane or crazy, I can see why you have such difficulty.</span></=
div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div></div><div class=
=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:0=
1 PM, Gavin Andresen <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:gavinandresen@=
gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gavinandresen@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<=
br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left=
:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">We really shouldn't =
have to go over "Bitcoin 101" on this mailing list, and this disc=
ussion should move to the not-yet-created more general discussion list.=C2=
=A0 I started this thread as a sanity check on myself, because I keep seein=
g smart people saying that two chains could persist for more than a few day=
s after a hard fork, and I still don't see how that would possibly work=
.<div><br></div><div>So: "fraud" would be 51% miners sending you =
bitcoin in exchange for something of value, you wait for confirmations and =
send them that something of value, and then the 51% reverses the transactio=
n.</div><div><br></div><div>Running a full node doesn't help.</div><div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div><div class=3D"h5"><br><div class=3D"gmail_=
quote">On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 1:55 PM, Allen Piscitello <span dir=3D"ltr">=
<<a href=3D"mailto:allen.piscitello@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">allen.p=
iscitello@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"=
><div dir=3D"ltr"><span>><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px">A dishonest mi=
ner majority can commit fraud against you, they can mine only empty blocks,=
they can do various other things that render your money worthless.</span><=
div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div></span><div><span sty=
le=3D"font-size:12.8px">Mining empty blocks is not fraud.</span></div><div>=
<span style=3D"font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"font-=
size:12.8px">If you want to use terms like "honest miners" and &q=
uot;fraud", please define them so we can at least be on the same page.=
</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div><div><s=
pan style=3D"font-size:12.8px">I am defining an honest miner as one that fo=
llows the rules of the protocol.=C2=A0 Obviously your definition is differe=
nt.</span></div></div><div><div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"=
ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:hearn@vinumeris.com" target=3D"_blank">hearn@vin=
umeris.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=
=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><span><block=
quote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc=
solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><span><div><span style=3D"font-si=
ze:12.8px">></span><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px">because Bitcoin'=
s basic security assumption is that a supermajority of miners are 'hone=
st.'</span></div><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px"><br></span></div=
></span><div><span style=3D"font-size:12.8px">Only if you rely on SPV.</spa=
n></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>No, you rely on miner=
s honesty even if you run a full node. This is in the white paper. A dishon=
est miner majority can commit fraud against you, they can mine only empty b=
locks, they can do various other things that render your money worthless.</=
div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div></div><=
/div><span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888">-- <br><div>--<br>Gavin=
Andresen<br></div>
</font></span></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--001a1141d150c387f50520e6ea17--
|
