📅 Original date posted:2017-01-26
📝 Original message:On 26 January 2017 at 18:20, Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>You can’t anti-replay if you don’t even know a hardfork might happen. And I think your hypothesis (replay reduces the incentive of split) 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.
--
--
Edmund Edgar
Founder, Social Minds Inc (KK)
Twitter: @edmundedgar
Linked In: edmundedgar
Skype: edmundedgar
http://www.socialminds.jp
Reality Keys
@realitykeys
ed at realitykeys.com
https://www.realitykeys.com
Edmund Edgar [ARCHIVE] /
npub1as…zu5p3
2023-06-07 17:55:43
in reply to nevent1q…a2h8
Author Public Key
npub1assqju94qjdpunps2yck2vtzfhnme5pclv0aantfajkjs5w2057quzu5p3Published at
2023-06-07 17:55:43Event JSON
{
"id": "a361d573ea06eb255393aa0f1c4f337f5856f31784e82f07c13e8c27fd4c0d78",
"pubkey": "ec200970b5049a1e4c3051316531624de7bcd038fb1fdecd69ecad2851ca7d3c",
"created_at": 1686160543,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"08564427a86ede87bab23151dbcfb043a11ce80299dd31e312bfe1aa29950657",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"fb7702f7f80bc91d0da5ec516bba1b59ff7e4356a0689d06a096cea93172cabc",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"492fa402e838904bdc8eb2c8fafa1aa895df26438bfd998c71b01cb9db550ff7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-01-26\n📝 Original message:On 26 January 2017 at 18:20, Johnson Lau via bitcoin-dev\n\u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003eYou can’t anti-replay if you don’t even know a hardfork might happen. And I think your hypothesis (replay reduces the incentive of split) is not supported by the ETC/ETH split.\n\nI agree with the general point you're making, but you *could*\nanti-replay without knowing about the fork, at least from a few dozen\nblocks into it. For example you could allow transactions to specify a\nrecent block hash (or some of the bytes thereof) and declare that they\nwant to be invalid if that block isn't in the parent chain.\n\nThis would potentially have benefits beyond economic hard-fork\nsituations: As a general principle, if the network that you're\ntransacting with doesn't look like the one you think you're\ntransacting with, you're going to have a bad day.\n\n-- \n-- \nEdmund Edgar\nFounder, Social Minds Inc (KK)\nTwitter: @edmundedgar\nLinked In: edmundedgar\nSkype: edmundedgar\nhttp://www.socialminds.jp\n\nReality Keys\n@realitykeys\ned at realitykeys.com\nhttps://www.realitykeys.com",
"sig": "1ffe7c599016efd2a53efd728242e9ebf49fc659b344bf6880848d5c78e5ad31e6c0537daa2357f08b25cb89e339e48759dae5c1ad96a1b0366c4c4d5c686ca6"
}