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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1TZPy4-0001DX-2Z
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:44:40 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.212.181 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.212.181; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wi0-f181.google.com;
Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com ([209.85.212.181])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1TZPy3-0003ln-5T
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:44:40 +0000
Received: by mail-wi0-f181.google.com with SMTP id hm2so1549532wib.10
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:44:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.216.193.220 with SMTP id k70mr2360484wen.35.1353087873049;
Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:44:33 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.216.236.30 with HTTP; Fri, 16 Nov 2012 09:44:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2WiCm+oQGJppWLGGVWsgaFg3mwtEEwcrXc+-Sy+K0V+Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAAS2fgTVp7PhdJMfz-huyOsp=6Ca9wH6cVkedMgntXnK+ZpDXg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgQWpkJZ26qx6_2ECVg3qGFw7H5Nx9L0ow0bboD6PWV4Lg@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2WiCm+oQGJppWLGGVWsgaFg3mwtEEwcrXc+-Sy+K0V+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 18:44:32 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: PdC5wTb-7-mB7UeNS3fGihonQCg
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3R8rCotBDfOYJ68Wicg11a999QAi=hmTrZ3HLzvvs3-w@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e6db2ee605e5e704cea0521f
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1TZPy3-0003ln-5T
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Electrum security model concerns
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 17:44:40 -0000
--0016e6db2ee605e5e704cea0521f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
BTW have you checked the code? I took a quick look and didn't see things I
was expecting to see. In particular I couldn't find any code that manages
wallet state in the presence of re-orgs. It appears to check that
transactions appeared in the block chain, but if there's a chain switch
it's not clear to me the wallet will be in the right state.
I saw a message from Thomas on his thread saying something like "can't
spend coins bug happens when there's a re-org and the server gives you the
wrong histories, to fix it reset your wallet and switch to a new server"
.... which to me rather implies there's no re-org handling at all.
If Electrum does end up doing all SPV work correctly, how is it different
to MultiBit? Just the deterministic wallet seeding?
On Fri, Nov 16, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote:
> Great to hear that.
--0016e6db2ee605e5e704cea0521f
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BTW have you checked the code? I took a quick look and didn't see thing=
s I was expecting to see. In particular I couldn't find any code that m=
anages wallet state in the presence of re-orgs. It appears to check that tr=
ansactions appeared in the block chain, but if there's a chain switch i=
t's not clear to me the wallet will be in the right state.<div>
<br></div><div>I saw a message from Thomas on his thread saying something l=
ike "can't spend coins bug happens when there's a re-org and t=
he server gives you the wrong histories, to fix it reset your wallet and sw=
itch to a new server" .... which to me rather implies there's no r=
e-org handling at all.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If Electrum does end up doing all SPV work correctly, h=
ow is it different to MultiBit? Just the deterministic wallet seeding?</div=
><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri, Nov =
16, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Mike Hearn <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:mik=
e@plan99.net" target=3D"_blank">mike@plan99.net</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Great to hear that.
</blockquote></div><br></div>
--0016e6db2ee605e5e704cea0521f--
|
