📅 Original date posted:2012-02-28
📝 Original message:On 02/28/2012 05:48 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> Hello all,
Hi,
> as some of you may know, a vulnerability has been found in how the
> Bitcoin reference client deals with duplicate transactions. Exploiting
> it is rather complex, requires some hash power, and has no financial
> benefit for the attacker. Still, it's a security hole, and we'd like
> to fix this as soon as possible.
>
> A simple way to fix this, is adding an extra protocol rule[1]:
>
> Do not allow blocks to contain a transaction whose hash is equal to
> that of a former transaction which has not yet been completely spent.
I don't know whether I understand this correctly, but there should be no
duplicate transaction hashes at all. So the rule should be: Do not allow
blocks to contain transaction hashes which are already present in that
branch.
If by a freak accident a transaction has the same hash as another
transaction in the chain, shouldn't the transaction be "tweaked" in some
way to avoid collision (generate a new target address for it or
something)? In any case this seams very-very unlikely to happen, or am I
missing something?
Robert.
Brautigam Róbert [ARCHIVE] /
npub17v…4nw5q
2023-06-07 03:09:29
in reply to nevent1q…3rfk
Author Public Key
npub17vt9s8f4fwjvrzscfqmdgdaq0zn2ephnqs53jynr8x6hu6vsd7wqm4nw5qSeen on
wss://relay.noswhere.comPublished at
2023-06-07 03:09:29Event JSON
{
"id": "3b27c755b2e86210995699797dd23f80d8726125e73699183c8091b8eb454c10",
"pubkey": "f316581d354ba4c18a184836d437a078a6ac86f3042919126339b57e69906f9c",
"created_at": 1686107369,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"431de1b2053f2297a5c4d8abb946e01d3f305001a64415bafb02369c2320d799",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"e4b7beb773d1a9b731c79487b44b974c73bddf99ec1a2ca5067637c1cbcb37c3",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2012-02-28\n📝 Original message:On 02/28/2012 05:48 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:\n\u003e Hello all,\n\nHi,\n\n\u003e as some of you may know, a vulnerability has been found in how the\n\u003e Bitcoin reference client deals with duplicate transactions. Exploiting\n\u003e it is rather complex, requires some hash power, and has no financial\n\u003e benefit for the attacker. Still, it's a security hole, and we'd like\n\u003e to fix this as soon as possible.\n\u003e\n\u003e A simple way to fix this, is adding an extra protocol rule[1]:\n\u003e\n\u003e Do not allow blocks to contain a transaction whose hash is equal to\n\u003e that of a former transaction which has not yet been completely spent.\n\nI don't know whether I understand this correctly, but there should be no \nduplicate transaction hashes at all. So the rule should be: Do not allow \nblocks to contain transaction hashes which are already present in that \nbranch.\n\nIf by a freak accident a transaction has the same hash as another \ntransaction in the chain, shouldn't the transaction be \"tweaked\" in some \nway to avoid collision (generate a new target address for it or \nsomething)? In any case this seams very-very unlikely to happen, or am I \nmissing something?\n\nRobert.",
"sig": "dfe2ffea4c172bdf66ffb92ad5a23ef7bd7c100c89ee70b4ec3cca1a74a4ed1502bf21eac137336036e6336ac8019a9d04777ce654485142f8c3584c66aa073d"
}