Peter Vessenes [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12 📝 Original message:Can some enterprising soul ...

📅 Original date posted:2013-03-12
📝 Original message:Can some enterprising soul determine if there were any double-spend
attempts?

I'm assuming no, and if that's the case, we should talk about that publicly.

Either way, I think it's generally another test well done by everyone;
people pitched in on PR, tech, communication, yay Bitcoin!



On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Alan Reiner <etotheipi at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 8:10 AM, Luke-Jr <luke at dashjr.org> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> I think we should be careful not to downplay the reality either.
>> For a number of hours, transactions could have received up to N
>> confirmations
>> and then still been reversed. While we could contact the bigger payment
>> processors, I saw people still trying to buy/sell on OTC, whom could have
>> been
>> scammed even by taking standard precautions.
>>
>>
> I don't want to misrepresent what happened, but how much of that was
> really a risk? The block was rejected, but the transactions were not. Any
> valid transactions to hit the network would get added to everyone's memory
> pool and mined in both chains. Thus all nodes would still reject
> double-spend attempts. As far as I understood it, you would've had to have
> majority mining power on one of the chains (and both had non-negligible
> computing power on them), so double-spending still required an exceptional
> amount of resources -- just not the normal 50% that is normally needed.
> Perhaps... 10%? But how many people can even have 10%? In addition to
> that, a victim needs to be found that hasn't seen the alert, is willing to
> execute a large transaction, and is on the wrong side of the chain.
>
> Is this incorrect? Yes, there was less resources needed to execute an
> attack -- but it still required a very powerful attacker, way outside the
> scope of "regular users."
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
> Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
> endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
> tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>


--
------------------------------

[image: CoinLab Logo]PETER VESSENES
CEO

*peter at coinlab.com * / 206.486.6856 / SKYPE: vessenes
811 FIRST AVENUE / SUITE 480 / SEATTLE, WA 98104
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130312/0e69d2ec/attachment.html>;