ð
Original date posted:2017-06-06
ð Original message:> CPFP can be used by an attacker to get your original txn into the 148 chain.
*err, my bad that's unlikely to happen, if I remember correctly CPFP can only be done by the person you're sending the coins to. Coin-mixing seems the better option of the two, but shouldn't the BIP148 folks wait until it's clear that will be supported by exchanges?
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.
> On Jun 6, 2017, at 4:27 PM, Tao Effect <contact at taoeffect.com <mailto:contact at taoeffect.com>> wrote:
>
>> CoinJoin works as a method of both improving fungibility and mixing with
>> coinbase transactions.
>
> My understanding is that the two situations are quite different.
>
> Unlike mixing to coin-split, CoinJoin doesn't create a high demand exclusively for coinbase transactions.
>
> However, of the proposed methods, coin-mixing seems the better option, because it might be reasonably easy (I don't know) for exchanges to obtain 148 coinbase coins, and mix their coins with them, extending the coin-splitting capability beyond just miner coins and then using that to split incoming coins.
>
> That seems like the most reasonable approach I've heard so far. Whether exchanges would be willing to do that is a separate question.
>
>> When it's confirmed on one chain, but not on the other, you
>> can then "double-spend" on the lower hashrate chain with a higher fee,
>> to end up with different coins on both chains.
>
> This method is time consuming and not guaranteed to work. CPFP can be used by an attacker to get your original txn into the 148 chain.
>
>> (also, no double-n in untenable)
>
> Why thank you aj, you're so good at spelling. :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Greg
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170606/35a6f6dc/attachment.html>;
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 801 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170606/35a6f6dc/attachment.sig>;
Tao Effect [ARCHIVE] /
npub1r0âŠvdpg3
2023-06-07 18:02:26
in reply to nevent1qâŠj855
Author Public Key
npub1r0g954grld59fuphzsypmuuhpdunq67f729afmp44h2mxvth2hts4vdpg3Published at
2023-06-07 18:02:26Event JSON
{
"id": "b8566a36963312ce1685ee8f1c8fad71826e64ceca267c365c53276cd815a321",
"pubkey": "1bd05a5503fb6854f03714081df3970b79306bc9f28bd4ec35add5b3317755d7",
"created_at": 1686160946,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"753128ff5203f7385f15743651b80e2131d69a7ed154ad15484c1ff10dea468c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"f5a5c4045d4a92240e64b4d2463c7b7a61f8de788f69725d02d0c7780b01d26f",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"1bd05a5503fb6854f03714081df3970b79306bc9f28bd4ec35add5b3317755d7"
]
],
"content": "ð
Original date posted:2017-06-06\nð Original message:\u003e CPFP can be used by an attacker to get your original txn into the 148 chain.\n\n*err, my bad that's unlikely to happen, if I remember correctly CPFP can only be done by the person you're sending the coins to. Coin-mixing seems the better option of the two, but shouldn't the BIP148 folks wait until it's clear that will be supported by exchanges?\n\n--\nPlease do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.\n\n\u003e On Jun 6, 2017, at 4:27 PM, Tao Effect \u003ccontact at taoeffect.com \u003cmailto:contact at taoeffect.com\u003e\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e CoinJoin works as a method of both improving fungibility and mixing with\n\u003e\u003e coinbase transactions.\n\u003e \n\u003e My understanding is that the two situations are quite different.\n\u003e \n\u003e Unlike mixing to coin-split, CoinJoin doesn't create a high demand exclusively for coinbase transactions.\n\u003e \n\u003e However, of the proposed methods, coin-mixing seems the better option, because it might be reasonably easy (I don't know) for exchanges to obtain 148 coinbase coins, and mix their coins with them, extending the coin-splitting capability beyond just miner coins and then using that to split incoming coins.\n\u003e \n\u003e That seems like the most reasonable approach I've heard so far. Whether exchanges would be willing to do that is a separate question.\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e When it's confirmed on one chain, but not on the other, you\n\u003e\u003e can then \"double-spend\" on the lower hashrate chain with a higher fee,\n\u003e\u003e to end up with different coins on both chains.\n\u003e \n\u003e This method is time consuming and not guaranteed to work. CPFP can be used by an attacker to get your original txn into the 148 chain.\n\u003e \n\u003e\u003e (also, no double-n in untenable)\n\u003e \n\u003e Why thank you aj, you're so good at spelling. :-)\n\u003e \n\u003e Cheers,\n\u003e Greg\n\u003e \n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170606/35a6f6dc/attachment.html\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 801 bytes\nDesc: Message signed with OpenPGP\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170606/35a6f6dc/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "544a0b5fae154585efef32318833a9ab5689c337ff779abd05949db1068323b3f2d6650e31c8102e53b67d12423937d1137dd9cabbd679ced35bd7d963756be2"
}