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
|
Return-Path: <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B898901
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 6 Jun 2017 23:02:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vk0-f50.google.com (mail-vk0-f50.google.com
[209.85.213.50])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2427D1A5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 6 Jun 2017 23:02:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vk0-f50.google.com with SMTP id p62so52439298vkp.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 06 Jun 2017 16:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
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:cc;
bh=EXjwB7jgv/QCRA//KFgi39iYpSBwmjvDzn97bpOu0hE=;
b=J0Hervu93OmEM3C6YO4yX3MGpf4zh+mTgW7zPyb+hzu3/7NGdN+f9f4K34gmPuHR0j
Vb2avEyxTawdTroqyKbbjnXPhdH0S0HZLBEfCi8KzoF+6KVB51iM83Y5UTzsTtVSyHLP
Jabi8+16IhlDvIWwlucfivOPO7VwmPu+LV26m1wp5mUmTOw3keT4gWlEBFNrCbqz+8ja
G9Oe4B74MfWHKbnZWzGF5GjczGTBDJ+1jhpmAIlZQZLr9ACyVM1K5Gjz45kcVCM8PR+m
PKJPBaRrlPMTxtbnhYXd1vCOx9+oQp8KvFOBiXQEif70AMMLX6gn+QyS3mW5l01voXJ/
mPdw==
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:cc;
bh=EXjwB7jgv/QCRA//KFgi39iYpSBwmjvDzn97bpOu0hE=;
b=Ll1ZW3S53dnrUTDd4tAJMn2kiXRrFw/ogM9r4rhgyjyTQC2vOVPufGIFVL0Us9/bWH
7oxXZ90/TRFwWuXxFcIee08PTos9b1oZQp2B+B9mwnK1xDqikCXQ4bLcZsPgweSNRBTd
WiSiB5L3zbV33EA0wbIb6CKC7wYGyeb26gUqu162wrhZmU8Nedji2AFl8LSvVO+FKS/V
fQoITNaW5dKdhaLr8sAXlwf6rfW64KtStlKjy4ZX26Fs6Hr2rS0UT92mSjfUvZubVv/1
rse2R6AQLXqFghcdfUQAMscr4mNjGB1+tiaIE6d1l1Rza6breCvFL6FaJY83QJc1sgTP
iMpw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcCIVj75AvBykq0Wtnvi/0vItV7E0nfSx+y9RhymVFmYfWNDDU2h
BtV67DUq7uuNjw5HDVlhFLcHEjFSDA==
X-Received: by 10.31.48.15 with SMTP id w15mr12545640vkw.130.1496790127191;
Tue, 06 Jun 2017 16:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: gmaxwell@gmail.com
Received: by 10.103.20.66 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Jun 2017 16:02:06 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <31833011-7179-49D1-A07E-8FD9556C4534@taoeffect.com>
References: <31833011-7179-49D1-A07E-8FD9556C4534@taoeffect.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 23:02:06 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ULUqVdoNn7izJuI6P6nLrX2koGs
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgSU+UtbJSSAhf0-Sd0GH-RGnZmv+WHWtFV2zHFW2q6_yg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable
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: Tue, 06 Jun 2017 23:02:14 -0000
On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> I believe the severity of replay attacks is going unvoiced and is not
> understood within the bitcoin community because of their lack of experience
> with them.
Please don't insult our community-- the issues with replay were
pointed out by us to Ethereum in advance and were cited specifically
in prior hardfork discussions long before Ethereum started editing
their ledger for the economic benefit of its centralized
administrators.
The lack of extensive discussion on these issues you're seeing is
rather symptomatic of engineers that take stability seriously not
taking BIP148 seriously; not symptomatic of people not knowing about
them. The same concerns also applies to all these HF proposals (which
for some reason you don't mention), arguably even stronger. The same
basic pattern exists: There are people that just don't care about the
technical issues who have made up their minds, and so you don't see
technical discussion. Those people who do see the issues already
called out the proposals as being ill-advised. Replay isn't even the
largest of the technical issues (network partitioning, for example, is
a much larger one).
BIP149 is arguably something of another matter in particular because
it has a time-frame that allows dealing with replay and other issues--
and particularly because it has a time-frame that can allow for the
avoidance of a meaningful fork at all.
|
