📅 Original date posted:2014-09-25
📝 Original message:Something like that would be a great help for SPV clients that can't
detect double spends on their own. (still limited of course to sybil
attack concerns)
Aaron Voisine
breadwallet.com
On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Matt Whitlock <bip at mattwhitlock.name> wrote:
> What's to stop an attacker from broadcasting millions of spends of the same output(s) and overwhelming nodes with slower connections? Might it be a better strategy not to relay the actual transactions (after the first) but rather only propagate (once) some kind of double-spend alert?
>
>
> On Thursday, 25 September 2014, at 7:02 pm, Aaron Voisine wrote:
>> There was some discussion of having nodes relay double-spends in order
>> to alert the network about double spend attempts.
>>
>> A lot more users will be using SPV wallets in the future, and one of
>> the techniques SPV clients use to judge how likely a transaction is to
>> be confirmed is if it propagates across the network. I wonder if and
>> when double-spend relaying is introduced, if nodes should also send
>> BIP61 reject messages or something along those lines to indicate which
>> transactions those nodes believe to be invalid, but are relaying
>> anyway.
>>
>> This would be subject to sybil attacks, as is monitoring propagation,
>> however it does still increase the cost of performing a 0 confirmation
>> double spend attack on an SPV client above just relaying double-spends
>> without indicating if a node believes the transaction to be valid.
>>
>> Aaron Voisine
>> breadwallet.com
>
Aaron Voisine [ARCHIVE] /
npub18g…knkzl
2023-06-07 15:25:58
in reply to nevent1q…f0yt
Author Public Key
npub18gjvug29c4yg46lmplq38e75gg6wn5mn8taytckcsr4jt8p74h3s5knkzlPublished at
2023-06-07 15:25:58Event JSON
{
"id": "1dca43235fcc6272e5c1c333e85cbd0f172f0ec7c9a54d6d296a9aef44cbb5fe",
"pubkey": "3a24ce2145c5488aebfb0fc113e7d44234e9d3733afa45e2d880eb259c3eade3",
"created_at": 1686151558,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"4f9ac54bd6567a8c3e1bbdc8600514d9552b8a33dc3e70bf70216815782b2480",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"889225b965c765170b27fb07a8c7c792e7713969673f8098c3a32f0a39f04d92",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f00d0858b09287e941ccbc491567cc70bdbc62d714628b167c1b76e7fef04d91"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-09-25\n📝 Original message:Something like that would be a great help for SPV clients that can't\ndetect double spends on their own. (still limited of course to sybil\nattack concerns)\n\nAaron Voisine\nbreadwallet.com\n\n\nOn Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Matt Whitlock \u003cbip at mattwhitlock.name\u003e wrote:\n\u003e What's to stop an attacker from broadcasting millions of spends of the same output(s) and overwhelming nodes with slower connections? Might it be a better strategy not to relay the actual transactions (after the first) but rather only propagate (once) some kind of double-spend alert?\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e On Thursday, 25 September 2014, at 7:02 pm, Aaron Voisine wrote:\n\u003e\u003e There was some discussion of having nodes relay double-spends in order\n\u003e\u003e to alert the network about double spend attempts.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e A lot more users will be using SPV wallets in the future, and one of\n\u003e\u003e the techniques SPV clients use to judge how likely a transaction is to\n\u003e\u003e be confirmed is if it propagates across the network. I wonder if and\n\u003e\u003e when double-spend relaying is introduced, if nodes should also send\n\u003e\u003e BIP61 reject messages or something along those lines to indicate which\n\u003e\u003e transactions those nodes believe to be invalid, but are relaying\n\u003e\u003e anyway.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e This would be subject to sybil attacks, as is monitoring propagation,\n\u003e\u003e however it does still increase the cost of performing a 0 confirmation\n\u003e\u003e double spend attack on an SPV client above just relaying double-spends\n\u003e\u003e without indicating if a node believes the transaction to be valid.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Aaron Voisine\n\u003e\u003e breadwallet.com\n\u003e",
"sig": "bc88fb510dc15e548f08ac7bf54868ea6966d5f3351a7b4580809eb0d8a4c57e34d9343e3dbb73113c0e86a8f54e5e7d3f870c98d4248e584fa0672cc0bb03b7"
}