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
|
Return-Path: <roconnor@blockstream.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA979C002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 20:35:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 955BA410C3
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 20:35:16 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 955BA410C3
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org;
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=blockstream-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com
header.i=@blockstream-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256
header.s=20210112 header.b=axPrBwEo
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001,
SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 JbKwWoGko4jc
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 20:35:15 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 2119C410C2
Received: from mail-qt1-x834.google.com (mail-qt1-x834.google.com
[IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::834])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2119C410C2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 20:35:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qt1-x834.google.com with SMTP id ck6so7964616qtb.7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 11 Jul 2022 13:35:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=blockstream-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=RqouIluR7rsUJwQEJ+zPJUxGnVGvwgKZyCbJ9MO2J+8=;
b=axPrBwEoUiGVbd2ImZVbTN3ktN2YnVMFHxRKQhuY2Y5bvfx8xCJdR3Q6Ohhsef6YwA
nvdZMG8Fclq17VdrhaLKdY2N5J6L/kDhhynm06DdglDrqFoB7NTfzJ39jutdXvw/iG3y
AxNPkzE3Q36aGDZdkMcERQu1RKCA5ndbmMk/3IZbRNL3nZdTN4K4vpwUuT2/IN6v3dJh
BPyW6btnoAu7dLC80HrqbrV8yUI3hhmLXNk1WTdl84B6QEvp+UfKxyT1gwzRSuaeSeLu
ewEaSI62a7befKVBMxrhXcCxWEzkaTzRSKJtRhPddp8rdlJjyiVk8Hf+yQ+0ui+Q28+v
j0ZA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20210112;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to;
bh=RqouIluR7rsUJwQEJ+zPJUxGnVGvwgKZyCbJ9MO2J+8=;
b=S9VIrMVV60XFR9596GHpxT8uOLZNwRyeD/Uki3cTrLzK57Jh1XtIRwwErLR5Dh6gSa
2G5+pojMiIXKm9ns/lDM1i47cPdhsDsUTEC0Ana8LtO6QzwzT6i0HdsGKde8Ev4RDL8g
bZM3DuIdmsQXvBxBjnTJcK44j5xIVxa4wxxtM6NdUh/rqhDlsEO+65UKc9CgEp0m3W4Z
egHW3pa5dKScJSA+hLAPnkaFv7Yy1aFbbDaEyCnmm5eIlEXByBFzTQBpfhB+0Uwdmi4K
fJt6y3vicS3Po9/MNUZrPvQl/Afzb3vtCIvPmZ4ONWjznSPxrmwc5J12M/WxatXEvSYw
qINQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/eFRbrlWhGWQUcnshsIG6OjmcjOFzLW406fkovwUNzIItanIen
5TOce9tGzsUOvFjwv/sSbzR2EaCg+M8rVrzvGuWkQDES9R4=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tcTioEH7bDIXJk3xJQmBq3ucc4fYQRWI0DjocsheqFBN76fuxKSuNz4y4ikcbGpKxsd2ehdOTisxMweJv203M=
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:389:b0:31d:3d5e:6317 with SMTP id
j9-20020a05622a038900b0031d3d5e6317mr15288239qtx.268.1657571713737; Mon, 11
Jul 2022 13:35:13 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHUJnBDYDbgr3C158o7c6_XXdG+kqJruFo=od_RmPFk_GS0udw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHUJnBDYDbgr3C158o7c6_XXdG+kqJruFo=od_RmPFk_GS0udw@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Russell O'Connor" <roconnor@blockstream.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 16:35:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMZUoKmN1Sj=C-asUKCB0hbe-V2fRMsFzNn6kcsJeigbnz3fgQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000002ffc2605e38d7de2"
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Security problems with relying on transaction
fees for security
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: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 20:35:16 -0000
--0000000000002ffc2605e38d7de2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 2:19 PM Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> If transaction fees came in at an even rate over time all at the exact
> same level then they work fine for security, acting similarly to fixed
> block rewards. Unfortunately that isn't how it works in the real world.
> There's a very well established day/night cycle with fees going to zero
> overnight and even longer gaps on weekends and holidays. If in the future
> Bitcoin is entirely dependent on fees for security (scheduled very
> strongly) and this pattern keeps up (overwhelmingly likely) then this is
> going to become a serious problem.
>
> What's likely to happen is that at first there will simply be no or very
> few blocks mined overnight. There are likely to be some, as miners at first
> turn off their mining rigs completely overnight then adopt the more
> sophisticated strategy of waiting until there are enough fees in the
> mempool to warrant attempting to make a block and only then doing it.
> Unfortunately the gaming doesn't end there. Eventually the miners with
> lower costs of operation will figure out that they can collectively reorg
> the last hour (or some time period) of the day overnight and this will be
> profitable. That's likely to cause the miners with more expensive
> operations to stop attempting mining the last hour of the day preemptively.
>
> What happens after that I'm not sure.
>
Miners will learn to create anyone-can-spend outputs to bribe other miners
to build on their block rather than reorg it. (Due to the coinbase
maturity, this will require some amount of floating capital.)
--0000000000002ffc2605e38d7de2
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail=
_attr">On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 2:19 PM Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev <<a hr=
ef=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linux=
foundation.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padd=
ing-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr">If transaction fees came in at an even rate =
over time all at the exact same level then they work fine for security, act=
ing similarly to fixed block rewards. Unfortunately that isn't how it w=
orks in the real world. There's a very well established day/night cycle=
with fees going to zero overnight and even longer gaps on weekends and hol=
idays. If in the future Bitcoin is entirely dependent on fees for security =
(scheduled very strongly) and this pattern keeps up (overwhelmingly likely)=
then this is going to become a serious problem.<div><br></div><div>What=
9;s likely to happen is that at first there will simply be no or very few b=
locks mined overnight. There are likely to be some, as miners at first turn=
off their mining rigs completely overnight then adopt the more sophisticat=
ed strategy of waiting until there are enough fees in the mempool to warran=
t attempting to make a block and only then doing it. Unfortunately the gami=
ng doesn't end there. Eventually the miners with lower costs of operati=
on will figure out that they can collectively reorg the last hour (or some =
time period) of the day overnight and this will be profitable. That's l=
ikely to cause the miners with more expensive operations to stop attempting=
mining the last hour of the day preemptively.=C2=A0</div><div><br></div><d=
iv>What happens after that I'm not sure.<br></div></div></blockquote><d=
iv><br></div><div>Miners will learn to create anyone-can-spend outputs to b=
ribe other miners to build on their block rather than reorg it.=C2=A0 (Due =
to the coinbase maturity, this will require some amount of floating capital=
.)<br></div></div></div>
--0000000000002ffc2605e38d7de2--
|
