📅 Original date posted:2015-03-01
📝 Original message:So let's play this out a little.. Let's call it "Solomon's spend[1]"
Exchange gets hacked, bitcoins move.
The exchange has a contract with an insurance company and miners for
'scorched earth' theft response that creates a double-spend of the
original transaction.
So now there's a 10,000 bitcoin incentive for miners to roll back the
chain and start (re)mining the block where the theft occurred.
The exchange gets an insurance payout, some miner wins the lottery, and
the thief gets nothing. Seems like a good deal, what am I missing?
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon
On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 04:06:13AM -0800, Eric Lombrozo wrote:
> I should note that my proposal does require a change to the consensus
> rules...but getting bitcoin to scale will require this no matter what.
>
> - Eric Lombrozo
> On Feb 22, 2015 3:41 AM, "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > It seems to me we're confusing two completely different motivations for
> > double-spending. One is the ability to replace a fee, the other is the
> > ability to replace outputs.
> >
> > If the double-spend were to merely add or remove inputs (but keep at least
> > one input in common, of course), it seems fairly safe to assume it's the
> > former, a genuine fee replacement. Even allowing for things like coinjoin,
> > none of the payees would really care either way.
> >
> > Conversely, if at least one of the inputs were kept but none of the
> > outputs were, we can be confident it's the the latter.
> >
> > It is possible to build a wallet that always does the former when doing
> > fee replacement by using another transaction to create an output with
> > exactly the additional desired fee.
> >
> > If we can clearly distinguish these two cases then the fee replacement
> > case can be handled by relaying both and letting miners pick one or the
> > other while the output replacement case could be handled by rewarding
> > everything to a miner (essentially all outputs are voided...made
> > unredeemable...and all inputs are added to coinbase) if the miner includes
> > the two conflicting transactions in the same block.
> >
> > Wouldn't this essentially solve the problem?
> >
> > - Eric Lombrozo
> > On Feb 21, 2015 8:09 PM, "Jeff Garzik" <jgarzik at bitpay.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:25 PM, Jorge Timón <jtimon at jtimon.cc> wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at bitpay.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> >> This isn't some theoretical exercise. Like it or not many use
> >> >> insecure 0-conf transactions for rapid payments. Deploying something
> >> >> that makes 0-conf transactions unusable would have a wide, negative
> >> >> impact on present day bitcoin payments, thus "scorched earth"
> >>
> >> > And maybe by maintaining first seen policies we're harming the system
> >> > in the long term by encouraging people to widely deploy systems based
> >> > on extremely weak assumptions.
> >>
> >> Lacking a coded, reviewed alternative, that's only a platitude.
> >> Widely used 0-conf payments are where we're at today. Simply ceasing
> >> the "maintaining [of] first seen policies" alone is simply not a
> >> realistic option. The negative impact to today's userbase would be
> >> huge.
> >>
> >> Instant payments need a security upgrade, yes.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jeff Garzik
> >> Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
> >> BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
> >>
> >>
> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
> >> from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
> >> with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
> >> Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
> >>
> >> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=190641631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> >> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
> >>
> >
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server
> from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards
> with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more
> Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=190641631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Troy Benjegerdes 'da hozer' hozer at hozed.org
7 elements earth::water::air::fire::mind::spirit::soul grid.coop
Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel,
nor try buy a hacker who makes money by the megahash
Troy Benjegerdes [ARCHIVE] /
npub1m6…rdjn5
2023-06-07 15:31:40
in reply to nevent1q…mms7
Author Public Key
npub1m6p5kgcd428x6pxyfege98zjmlwrdhp0gyz6pdnsvrvalscddnxqurdjn5Published at
2023-06-07 15:31:40Event JSON
{
"id": "77064c02d0c9f9d1f439ba6a0224c0f973c43d9a095c82cd74b2c9a14a76dd14",
"pubkey": "de834b230daa8e6d04c44e51929c52dfdc36dc2f4105a0b67060d9dfc30d6ccc",
"created_at": 1686151900,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"fff8c1accb2d7e9cf30e26379c2767633e21c14ebd8f4fed8b925872943892ac",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"5740463b0206247c4cc6b824ce7fdac7ef8b49c13c4f05fcad500a1c759c7cd5",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"de834b230daa8e6d04c44e51929c52dfdc36dc2f4105a0b67060d9dfc30d6ccc"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-03-01\n📝 Original message:So let's play this out a little.. Let's call it \"Solomon's spend[1]\"\n\nExchange gets hacked, bitcoins move.\n\nThe exchange has a contract with an insurance company and miners for \n'scorched earth' theft response that creates a double-spend of the \noriginal transaction.\n\nSo now there's a 10,000 bitcoin incentive for miners to roll back the\nchain and start (re)mining the block where the theft occurred.\n\nThe exchange gets an insurance payout, some miner wins the lottery, and\nthe thief gets nothing. Seems like a good deal, what am I missing?\n\n[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judgment_of_Solomon\n\nOn Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 04:06:13AM -0800, Eric Lombrozo wrote:\n\u003e I should note that my proposal does require a change to the consensus\n\u003e rules...but getting bitcoin to scale will require this no matter what.\n\u003e \n\u003e - Eric Lombrozo\n\u003e On Feb 22, 2015 3:41 AM, \"Eric Lombrozo\" \u003celombrozo at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e \u003e It seems to me we're confusing two completely different motivations for\n\u003e \u003e double-spending. One is the ability to replace a fee, the other is the\n\u003e \u003e ability to replace outputs.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e If the double-spend were to merely add or remove inputs (but keep at least\n\u003e \u003e one input in common, of course), it seems fairly safe to assume it's the\n\u003e \u003e former, a genuine fee replacement. Even allowing for things like coinjoin,\n\u003e \u003e none of the payees would really care either way.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Conversely, if at least one of the inputs were kept but none of the\n\u003e \u003e outputs were, we can be confident it's the the latter.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e It is possible to build a wallet that always does the former when doing\n\u003e \u003e fee replacement by using another transaction to create an output with\n\u003e \u003e exactly the additional desired fee.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e If we can clearly distinguish these two cases then the fee replacement\n\u003e \u003e case can be handled by relaying both and letting miners pick one or the\n\u003e \u003e other while the output replacement case could be handled by rewarding\n\u003e \u003e everything to a miner (essentially all outputs are voided...made\n\u003e \u003e unredeemable...and all inputs are added to coinbase) if the miner includes\n\u003e \u003e the two conflicting transactions in the same block.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Wouldn't this essentially solve the problem?\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e - Eric Lombrozo\n\u003e \u003e On Feb 21, 2015 8:09 PM, \"Jeff Garzik\" \u003cjgarzik at bitpay.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 10:25 PM, Jorge Timón \u003cjtimon at jtimon.cc\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e On Sat, Feb 21, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Jeff Garzik \u003cjgarzik at bitpay.com\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e\u003e This isn't some theoretical exercise. Like it or not many use\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e\u003e insecure 0-conf transactions for rapid payments. Deploying something\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e\u003e that makes 0-conf transactions unusable would have a wide, negative\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e\u003e impact on present day bitcoin payments, thus \"scorched earth\"\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e And maybe by maintaining first seen policies we're harming the system\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e in the long term by encouraging people to widely deploy systems based\n\u003e \u003e\u003e \u003e on extremely weak assumptions.\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Lacking a coded, reviewed alternative, that's only a platitude.\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Widely used 0-conf payments are where we're at today. Simply ceasing\n\u003e \u003e\u003e the \"maintaining [of] first seen policies\" alone is simply not a\n\u003e \u003e\u003e realistic option. The negative impact to today's userbase would be\n\u003e \u003e\u003e huge.\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Instant payments need a security upgrade, yes.\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e --\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Jeff Garzik\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist\n\u003e \u003e\u003e BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server\n\u003e \u003e\u003e from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards\n\u003e \u003e\u003e with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration \u0026 more\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=190641631\u0026iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk\n\u003e \u003e\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e \u003e\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e \u003e\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\n\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server\n\u003e from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards\n\u003e with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration \u0026 more\n\u003e Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE\n\u003e http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=190641631\u0026iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk\n\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\n\n-- \n----------------------------------------------------------------------------\nTroy Benjegerdes 'da hozer' hozer at hozed.org\n7 elements earth::water::air::fire::mind::spirit::soul grid.coop\n\n Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel,\n nor try buy a hacker who makes money by the megahash",
"sig": "828b219931bb22ef5605886b509ec4474930ce3d107cf60a8e99ab516772d79d163f8b6a043aae76a623f05059c79531f84b58272589281c65b24ca42e088491"
}