📅 Original date posted:2015-12-17
📝 Original message:On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:46 PM, jl2012 <jl2012 at xbt.hk> wrote:
> This is not correct.
>
> As only about 1/3 of nodes support BIP65 now, would you consider CLTV tx
> are less secure than others? I don't think so. Since one invalid CLTV tx
> will make the whole block invalid. Having more nodes to fully validate
> non-CLTV txs won't make them any safer. The same logic also applies to SW
> softfork.
>
Yes - the logic applies to all soft forks. Each soft fork degrades the
security of non-upgraded nodes.
The core design of bitcoin is that trustless nodes validate the work of
miners, not trust them.
Soft forks move in the opposite direction. Each new soft-forked feature
leans very heavily on miner trust rather than P2P network validation.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151217/b7b9e80f/attachment.html>;
Jeff Garzik [ARCHIVE] /
npub1kf…f3f58
2023-06-07 17:46:43
in reply to nevent1q…5dgu
Author Public Key
npub1kf0ppcjaguxekg24yx6smgxlu73qn0k8lm0t2wrqc0scpl7u3sgsmf3f58Published at
2023-06-07 17:46:43Event JSON
{
"id": "4fcfac0e13860a4bdeb77e96d57ef20e7e833d30152cd0489c9f0650e3be0420",
"pubkey": "b25e10e25d470d9b215521b50da0dfe7a209bec7fedeb53860c3e180ffdc8c11",
"created_at": 1686160003,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"46b1d48aa4e00b636e8dc4e9c37e717542bb528954bcd46114dd6b14e1119e69",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"90b50bb5d2189debf713bc07e3b7f7a832ba0104cb6944faa4ddc7289debbea6",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"cd753aa8fbc112e14ffe9fe09d3630f0eff76ca68e376e004b8e77b687adddba"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-12-17\n📝 Original message:On Thu, Dec 17, 2015 at 1:46 PM, jl2012 \u003cjl2012 at xbt.hk\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e This is not correct.\n\u003e\n\u003e As only about 1/3 of nodes support BIP65 now, would you consider CLTV tx\n\u003e are less secure than others? I don't think so. Since one invalid CLTV tx\n\u003e will make the whole block invalid. Having more nodes to fully validate\n\u003e non-CLTV txs won't make them any safer. The same logic also applies to SW\n\u003e softfork.\n\u003e\n\n\nYes - the logic applies to all soft forks. Each soft fork degrades the\nsecurity of non-upgraded nodes.\n\nThe core design of bitcoin is that trustless nodes validate the work of\nminers, not trust them.\n\nSoft forks move in the opposite direction. Each new soft-forked feature\nleans very heavily on miner trust rather than P2P network validation.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151217/b7b9e80f/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "2c34c32da78e8a9e311769c9f1427e88844924b697c441cf83c9a6313a5a3bb9549ec9ec6202dcccd2873ec2114c0ebad00f1e07d315f5e8c9a8a087b32f390b"
}