📅 Original date posted:2014-06-06
📝 Original message:On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:02:36AM +0200, Raúl Martínez wrote:
> I dont know if this attack is even possible, it came to my mind and I will
> try to explain it as good as possible.
>
> Some transacions keep unconfirmed forever and finally they are purged by
> Bitcoin nodes, mostly due to the lack of fees.
>
It's definitely possible. As Pieter says it is important to always reuse
inputs if you are "resending" a transaction. If you don't reuse inputs,
you are creating a new transaction and you should think of it as
spending twice as much money.
Like any information on the Internet, once a signed transaction leaves
your system there is no way to undo this. (Though of course, you can
respend the inputs to ensure that if ever your transaction resurfaces it
will not confirm.) This is true even if the transaction has low fees, is
nonstandard, or is otherwise inhibited from relaying.
I would go so far as to say that any UI which suggests otherwise (e.g.
offering a "cancel" feature which does not involve respending inputs or
that makes any guarantees about being effective) is dangerously broken.
--
Andrew Poelstra
Mathematics Department, University of Texas at Austin
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140606/20d1c22a/attachment.sig>;
Andrew Poelstra [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ae…z5t04
2023-06-07 15:22:32
in reply to nevent1q…mf09
Author Public Key
npub1ae27kq6z802dkqw4ey4dgdx493szm8dpmcm76d7vt0ma9gf6fj4svz5t04Published at
2023-06-07 15:22:32Event JSON
{
"id": "7dbb995ee31973cf68c528c1f944966f8a33cf3f322dd46b9924441984c7d965",
"pubkey": "ee55eb03423bd4db01d5c92ad434d52c602d9da1de37ed37cc5bf7d2a13a4cab",
"created_at": 1686151352,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"cbb174ea85b9dacae067701d2a72c39f177c8fe3d0de58a0e458c8fc2eecdacd",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"fa5c9c06123f4f1a536ae6e7613b3176cc7c2df8d5c549010e609460777123f3",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-06-06\n📝 Original message:On Sat, Jun 07, 2014 at 12:02:36AM +0200, Raúl Martínez wrote:\n\u003e I dont know if this attack is even possible, it came to my mind and I will\n\u003e try to explain it as good as possible.\n\u003e \n\u003e Some transacions keep unconfirmed forever and finally they are purged by\n\u003e Bitcoin nodes, mostly due to the lack of fees.\n\u003e\n\nIt's definitely possible. As Pieter says it is important to always reuse\ninputs if you are \"resending\" a transaction. If you don't reuse inputs,\nyou are creating a new transaction and you should think of it as\nspending twice as much money.\n\nLike any information on the Internet, once a signed transaction leaves\nyour system there is no way to undo this. (Though of course, you can\nrespend the inputs to ensure that if ever your transaction resurfaces it\nwill not confirm.) This is true even if the transaction has low fees, is\nnonstandard, or is otherwise inhibited from relaying.\n\nI would go so far as to say that any UI which suggests otherwise (e.g.\noffering a \"cancel\" feature which does not involve respending inputs or\nthat makes any guarantees about being effective) is dangerously broken.\n\n-- \nAndrew Poelstra\nMathematics Department, University of Texas at Austin\nEmail: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net\nWeb: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: not available\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 490 bytes\nDesc: not available\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140606/20d1c22a/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "4b26f8497f81a6cf025db3c5523198fafe72923469105f23bc10d73fb9d6ba484e33115893a403d73d3b966cc5a484df4d03ceee3b9029fcaa5e2b61e0c3e97f"
}