public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Zeroconf-safe tx replacement (replace-for-fee)
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2013 06:59:25 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131104115925.GB1013@savin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131104111038.GA24552@netbook.cypherspace.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1267 bytes --]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2013 at 12:10:38PM +0100, Adam Back wrote:
> Might leak less wiggle room and be simpler/more robut to validate that
> *everything* has to be the same except for the amount going to one (presumed
> change) address.  A privacy leak I know, but dont do that - ie send enough
> change the first time.  And network analysis has shown change addresses
> arent adding hardly any privacy.
> 
> We need more robust privacy fixes independently.  I do not support damaging
> the 0-conf feature, so I think this later approach is a better track for
> revising fees.

There's been a number of uses found for tx-replacement beyond simply
modifying fees. In additition, allowing for the value of a specificly
designated change address to be changed after the fact is not compatible
with current zero-conf-using implementations; they don't know to treat a
txout as special so allowing its value to be reduced would allow for a
zeroconf attack.

Anyway, if you look at the code that actually implements the
replacement, it's extremely simple already. I see no reason to make it
less general; transaction relaying rules are not part of consensus.

-- 
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000a6dd96c551eca7299463e4e523462798a006535f412b519c7

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 685 bytes --]

      reply	other threads:[~2013-11-04 11:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-10-24 14:30 [Bitcoin-development] Making fee estimation better Peter Todd
2013-10-24 14:38 ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-24 14:43   ` Peter Todd
2013-10-24 14:46     ` Mike Hearn
2013-10-24 14:54       ` Peter Todd
2013-10-24 20:39         ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-25  7:07           ` Peter Todd
2013-10-25 12:02             ` Andreas Petersson
2013-10-25 13:29               ` Mark Friedenbach
2013-10-25 14:08                 ` Andreas Petersson
2013-10-25 16:13               ` Peter Todd
2013-10-25 19:35                 ` Jeremy Spilman
2013-10-25 22:13                   ` Peter Todd
2013-10-25  7:51           ` Jeremy Spilman
2013-10-25 22:49             ` Peter Todd
2013-10-26  0:25             ` Gavin Andresen
2013-10-26  7:28               ` Peter Todd
2013-10-28  7:17               ` John Dillon
2013-11-04 10:52                 ` [Bitcoin-development] Zeroconf-safe tx replacement (replace-for-fee) Peter Todd
2013-11-04 11:10                   ` Adam Back
2013-11-04 11:59                     ` Peter Todd [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20131104115925.GB1013@savin \
    --to=pete@petertodd.org \
    --cc=adam@cypherspace.org \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox