📅 Original date posted:2015-07-16
📝 Original message:Hello,
What are these pre- and post-Hearn-relay drop rules you are speaking
about? Can anybody shed some light on this? (I am aware of the
minrelaytxfee setting proposed in the 0.11.0 release notes, I just
don't see what this has to do with Mike Hearn, BitcoinXT, and whether
there's a code change related to this that I missed).
Related: is there somewhere a chart that plots `estimatefee` over
time? Would be interesting to see how the fee market evolved over
these past weeks.
Regards
Arne
On 15/07/15 05:29, simongreen--- via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> With my black hat on I recently performed numerous profitable
> double-spend attacks against zeroconf accepting fools. With my
> white hat on, I'm warning everyone. The strategy is simple:
>
> tx1: To merchant, but dust/low-fee/reused-address/large-size/etc.
> anything that miners don't always accept.
>
> tx2: After merchant gives up valuable thing in return, normal tx
> without triggering spam protections. (loltasticly a Mike Hearn
> Bitcoin XT node was used to relay the double-spends)
>
> Example success story: tx1 paying Shapeshift.io with 6uBTC output
> is not dust under post-Hearn-relay-drop rules, but is dust under
> pre-Hearn-relay-drop rules, followed by tx2 w/o the output and not
> paying Shapeshift.io. F2Pool/Eligius/BTCChina/AntPool etc. are all
> miners who have reverted Hearn's 10x relay fee drop as recommended
> by v0.11.0 release notes and accept these double-spends.
> Shapeshift.io lost ~3 BTC this week in multiple txs. (they're no
> longer accepting zeroconf)
>
> Example success story #2: tx1 with post-Hearn-relay drop fee,
> followed by tx2 with higher fee. Such stupidly low fee txs just
> don't get mined, so wait for a miner to mine tx2. Bought a silly
> amount of reddit gold off Coinbase this way among other things. I'm
> surprised that reddit didn't cancel the "fools-gold" after tx
> reversal. (did Coinbase guarantee those txs?) Also found multiple
> Bitcoin ATMs vulnerable to this attack. (but simulated attack with
> tx2s still paying ATM because didn't want to go to trouble of good
> phys opsec)
>
> Shoutouts to BitPay who did things right and notified merchant
> properly when tx was reversed.
>
> In summary, every target depending on zeroconf vulnerable and lost
> significant sums of money to totally trivial attacks with high
> probability. No need for RBF to do this, just normal variations in
> miner policy. Shapeshift claims to use Super Sophisticated Network
> Sybil Attacking Monitoring from Blockcypher, but relay nodes !=
> miner policy.
>
> Consider yourself warned! My hat is whiter than most, and my skills
> not particularly good.
>
> What to do? Users: Listen to the experts and stop relying on
> zeroconf. Black hats: Profit!
>
> _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing
> list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--
Arne Brutschy <abrutschy at xylon.de>
Arne Brutschy [ARCHIVE] /
npub1na…gn6n0
2023-06-07 15:42:24
in reply to nevent1q…qfce
Author Public Key
npub1nannayg2dy65q9hrtzh8e93tk0c2twle2ae96lqtcutfxqvev07s6gn6n0Published at
2023-06-07 15:42:24Event JSON
{
"id": "9214691700bb497b5a3166c97654d84b81844f36c0780f2d0333fbc6a94673a7",
"pubkey": "9f673e910a69354016e358ae7c962bb3f0a5bbf957725d7c0bc71693019963fd",
"created_at": 1686152544,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"8cfdb6ed676e52875cd3360f4e3b9fd8a9125080a56694ae91a3defb5a52e9fc",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"c17b38043c68c1e729190fbbde0233dddcb7850f850b2727bf2a8cf06e103f05",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"387e445369d89df65b067a6fc6a7ff89a81bc98cfa3eeab512d2e99b9027f2d6"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-07-16\n📝 Original message:Hello,\n\nWhat are these pre- and post-Hearn-relay drop rules you are speaking\nabout? Can anybody shed some light on this? (I am aware of the\nminrelaytxfee setting proposed in the 0.11.0 release notes, I just\ndon't see what this has to do with Mike Hearn, BitcoinXT, and whether\nthere's a code change related to this that I missed).\n\nRelated: is there somewhere a chart that plots `estimatefee` over\ntime? Would be interesting to see how the fee market evolved over\nthese past weeks.\n\nRegards\nArne\n\nOn 15/07/15 05:29, simongreen--- via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e With my black hat on I recently performed numerous profitable \n\u003e double-spend attacks against zeroconf accepting fools. With my\n\u003e white hat on, I'm warning everyone. The strategy is simple:\n\u003e \n\u003e tx1: To merchant, but dust/low-fee/reused-address/large-size/etc. \n\u003e anything that miners don't always accept.\n\u003e \n\u003e tx2: After merchant gives up valuable thing in return, normal tx\n\u003e without triggering spam protections. (loltasticly a Mike Hearn\n\u003e Bitcoin XT node was used to relay the double-spends)\n\u003e \n\u003e Example success story: tx1 paying Shapeshift.io with 6uBTC output\n\u003e is not dust under post-Hearn-relay-drop rules, but is dust under \n\u003e pre-Hearn-relay-drop rules, followed by tx2 w/o the output and not \n\u003e paying Shapeshift.io. F2Pool/Eligius/BTCChina/AntPool etc. are all \n\u003e miners who have reverted Hearn's 10x relay fee drop as recommended\n\u003e by v0.11.0 release notes and accept these double-spends.\n\u003e Shapeshift.io lost ~3 BTC this week in multiple txs. (they're no\n\u003e longer accepting zeroconf)\n\u003e \n\u003e Example success story #2: tx1 with post-Hearn-relay drop fee,\n\u003e followed by tx2 with higher fee. Such stupidly low fee txs just\n\u003e don't get mined, so wait for a miner to mine tx2. Bought a silly\n\u003e amount of reddit gold off Coinbase this way among other things. I'm\n\u003e surprised that reddit didn't cancel the \"fools-gold\" after tx\n\u003e reversal. (did Coinbase guarantee those txs?) Also found multiple\n\u003e Bitcoin ATMs vulnerable to this attack. (but simulated attack with\n\u003e tx2s still paying ATM because didn't want to go to trouble of good\n\u003e phys opsec)\n\u003e \n\u003e Shoutouts to BitPay who did things right and notified merchant\n\u003e properly when tx was reversed.\n\u003e \n\u003e In summary, every target depending on zeroconf vulnerable and lost \n\u003e significant sums of money to totally trivial attacks with high \n\u003e probability. No need for RBF to do this, just normal variations in\n\u003e miner policy. Shapeshift claims to use Super Sophisticated Network\n\u003e Sybil Attacking Monitoring from Blockcypher, but relay nodes !=\n\u003e miner policy.\n\u003e \n\u003e Consider yourself warned! My hat is whiter than most, and my skills\n\u003e not particularly good.\n\u003e \n\u003e What to do? Users: Listen to the experts and stop relying on\n\u003e zeroconf. Black hats: Profit!\n\u003e \n\u003e _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing\n\u003e list bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org \n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\n-- \nArne Brutschy \u003cabrutschy at xylon.de\u003e",
"sig": "bdd33950db27f9c0ffbbab5e10fb4a1d5340f3e46d8103300ace53aa0942bf28e53013164c0115dddf3e25158002fe19151b7fde50a253b92b267d1424528784"
}