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
|
Return-Path: <edmund.edgar@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 204FDB2A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:55:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-lf0-f45.google.com (mail-lf0-f45.google.com
[209.85.215.45])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FE8CE2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:55:44 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-lf0-f45.google.com with SMTP id x1so56809278lff.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 26 Jan 2017 02:55:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=rKdwhi2J/qdwlqkjfKHXK5Pt946mDdK/yz5v0XV7Pu4=;
b=EEguay/ZHm/9BV4HCn/B5gbjjnU8hfxCoin9fZvSFyyhSdobm93gYyLv6ebu4qKLeS
jxB000bjni2TPJRtCBzyJgvW8iO6v42fU1k81ok9fL6gMSxI4Sz2AuzGZ5YnYytt3UaR
vgS81YBut83MSW+/ejcoQpirYRl4n4aeuijyU6238OYruIgtpiRJdPnDTmhjjRtne/yO
63e9V8CTrnmzeK1cHywMctoJPXdG0gdN7ed9TBF4YsXq1xIlA6R8qTtmE12L0fzKPwsk
qBgHBIEWVkB+1ipw7lYHwQkyBeD8xjj+9Wzurz9H6oRM6kE6VimH2wmSfGE/4qdaiz/l
gLSw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
:date:message-id:subject:to:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=rKdwhi2J/qdwlqkjfKHXK5Pt946mDdK/yz5v0XV7Pu4=;
b=s1HrnH+EGs8sJ70SH0/w3RPgxhqxEC6/KapnOxi+7oc6oDY+XflazbS46QmFMfwK3L
WMeTh6Mc4wiaEI8pQcU6qNWPON7ZWwoTq9nVoWMGdQ6ERivKOnJXWuFYkBptVVmRFY+T
0fE3+SA1WYS//pClNxZqIKtG9cDF+HxnuPHKXkeVSYJjjtyIkEHlWoUZFIA1yR225AOk
M2/bLamqjup3XNtdHkx+qzdF6cBiyAVApyrnXapxccHa7NMR1l0xZ8KMztz7K0U+9XWw
U/KI+cqvE2jZqvlHpq7fW3HJloVUWUSx/pfhvMBV3exwV/o+6XEdk8lXmU9UpOw5UPGF
ZYjg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIBusXXJtYiNMCqJx+qGBbHtwmIAFDcz95kdr11qi5iLPiR0ZcHI7c00npnaTS5tixyIVfzU10ZdRdlQw==
X-Received: by 10.25.166.131 with SMTP id p125mr655058lfe.142.1485428142496;
Thu, 26 Jan 2017 02:55:42 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: edmund.edgar@gmail.com
Received: by 10.25.16.222 with HTTP; Thu, 26 Jan 2017 02:55:41 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <7AF0AA6D-C144-4D0C-B5FC-0BC2C79C0D26@xbt.hk>
References: <A182F080-F154-4F05-B2F1-21B90E469267@xbt.hk>
<93ac7433-470c-d59e-e085-29f0f1613676@mattcorallo.com>
<CAAcC9ys4dH3hFzXJon7ho_TP3YwOd=SB2DB0oW5-NnNY5Q19Cw@mail.gmail.com>
<CEA70782-BE59-486E-BD79-0446A73DEDC3@xbt.hk>
<CAAcC9ytGJUe8_va+Ft2u=1SLm=0=vTpm1QPhJekNGh-WvktW8A@mail.gmail.com>
<7AF0AA6D-C144-4D0C-B5FC-0BC2C79C0D26@xbt.hk>
From: Edmund Edgar <ed@realitykeys.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 19:55:41 +0900
X-Google-Sender-Auth: m4laKuGHd3Yg2NDkghltaqvBQZI
Message-ID: <CA+su7OU+59vE28G-d67BeBXb5Cnu1kYDkPUPzZjURBwLe0V6zQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM 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, 26 Jan 2017 11:15:03 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Anti-transaction replay in a hardfork
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 10:55:45 -0000
On 26 January 2017 at 18:20, Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>You can=E2=80=99t anti-replay if you don=E2=80=99t even know a hardfork mi=
ght happen. And I think your hypothesis (replay reduces the incentive of sp=
lit) is not supported by the ETC/ETH split.
I agree with the general point you're making, but you *could*
anti-replay without knowing about the fork, at least from a few dozen
blocks into it. For example you could allow transactions to specify a
recent block hash (or some of the bytes thereof) and declare that they
want to be invalid if that block isn't in the parent chain.
This would potentially have benefits beyond economic hard-fork
situations: As a general principle, if the network that you're
transacting with doesn't look like the one you think you're
transacting with, you're going to have a bad day.
--=20
--=20
Edmund Edgar
Founder, Social Minds Inc (KK)
Twitter: @edmundedgar
Linked In: edmundedgar
Skype: edmundedgar
http://www.socialminds.jp
Reality Keys
@realitykeys
ed@realitykeys.com
https://www.realitykeys.com
|
