📅 Original date posted:2013-11-05
📝 Original message:On 5 November 2013 20:51, <colj at safe-mail.net> wrote:
> Possible Solution:
> If N amount of blocks built of the same previous block are received within
> a time frame of T mine on the block with the lowest hash.
>
> Logic:
> In order for Alice to pull of this attack she not only has to propagate
> her blocks first she must also ensure her blocks are of the smallest hash.
>
> Alice would now have to decrease her target to pull of this attack. Since
> she has a lower target it will take her longer to find a valid block
> negating her time advantage.
If I understand the issue properly, this seems like a pretty elegant
solution: if two blocks are broadcast within a certain period of eachother,
chose the lower target. That's a provable fair way of randomly choosing the
winning block and would seem like a pretty simply patch.
Drak
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131105/378a96dc/attachment.html>;
Drak [ARCHIVE] /
npub12r…3aqxc
2023-06-07 15:08:58
in reply to nevent1q…r2jj
Author Public Key
npub12rkw0jajmsck4uwdtksdvtswrlkypusfryjzera7m4fhqta6jhdsz3aqxcPublished at
2023-06-07 15:08:58Event JSON
{
"id": "4038eeefc3161f4801ebb506b821a38fd7cc886e64ff210d2cd9aedfe3377c09",
"pubkey": "50ece7cbb2dc316af1cd5da0d62e0e1fec40f20919242c8fbedd53702fba95db",
"created_at": 1686150538,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"dd9a0a21ae453b21f17e719fb1891cdb2e4fc4a879915c5fae5b4e2c57852fb3",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"08956d603d72edb21cb1c319486b2ffdde89e36daf3b37b27fa8f12210fe5c00",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"388299928341f4a3404cb45b5bce7d7c7d893db9df9a14475d1706e314ae0cd2"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2013-11-05\n📝 Original message:On 5 November 2013 20:51, \u003ccolj at safe-mail.net\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e Possible Solution:\n\u003e If N amount of blocks built of the same previous block are received within\n\u003e a time frame of T mine on the block with the lowest hash.\n\u003e\n\u003e Logic:\n\u003e In order for Alice to pull of this attack she not only has to propagate\n\u003e her blocks first she must also ensure her blocks are of the smallest hash.\n\u003e\n\u003e Alice would now have to decrease her target to pull of this attack. Since\n\u003e she has a lower target it will take her longer to find a valid block\n\u003e negating her time advantage.\n\n\nIf I understand the issue properly, this seems like a pretty elegant\nsolution: if two blocks are broadcast within a certain period of eachother,\nchose the lower target. That's a provable fair way of randomly choosing the\nwinning block and would seem like a pretty simply patch.\n\nDrak\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131105/378a96dc/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "cc5939b77b4b636d7dcfa4f0a432e051cd905ff4260ea55c42035b9d208e0cdd59b9ba82361c25ec8ae77c6b75ab91f83705bbbcc20fac212c13ec87ae00caf7"
}