From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from silver.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A015CC0175; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:29:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F93220478; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:29:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from silver.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vPf4B3tw1CuD; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:29:33 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from newmail.dtrt.org (li1228-87.members.linode.com [45.79.129.87]) by silver.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FDA920134; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:29:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from harding by newmail.dtrt.org with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jRLzv-0000X9-O5; Wed, 22 Apr 2020 16:29:31 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 16:28:13 -0400 From: "David A. Harding" To: Antoine Riard Message-ID: <20200422202813.oadvvn4j3oe7geq6@ganymede> References: <20200422182454.3y3foxxhiovokovp@ganymede> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="jmnpe62yxqvsc2xq" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , lightning-dev Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] RBF Pinning with Counterparties and Competing Interest X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2020 20:29:34 -0000 --jmnpe62yxqvsc2xq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 03:03:29PM -0400, Antoine Riard wrote: > > In that case, would it be worth re-implementing something like a BIP61 > reject message but with an extension that returns the txids of any > conflicts? >=20 > That's an interesting idea, but an attacker can create a local conflict in > your mempool You don't need a mempool to send a transaction. You can just open connections to random Bitcoin nodes directly and try sending your transaction. That's what a lite client is going to do anyway. If the pinned transaction is in the mempools of a significant number of Bitcoin nodes, then it should take just a few random connections to find one of those nodes, learn about the conflict, and download the pinned transaction. If that's not acceptable, you could find some other way to poll a significant number of people with mempools, e.g. BIP35 mempool messages or reusing the payment hash in a bunch of 1 msat probes to LN nodes who opt-in to scanning their bitcoind's mempools for a corresponding preimage. -Dave --jmnpe62yxqvsc2xq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCgAdFiEEgxUkqkMp0LnoXjCr2dtBqWwiadMFAl6gqN0ACgkQ2dtBqWwi adNHJQ//cR2TZQGYUugU2m/1YXuKk6Pj9dnmOKGq7K+owyFudp289noe/SJtm4yT FEfat7G9ui6BGz3mdct203m+VH+efSu3uCsLLB+DiMTTPH9ofvio2DLcgBuUgPIG 3z8bSwJlEbUv319V4XlNa8UYFU4ZlNqdP9sbydgACWOLVyv+XxPeK3tlxT4j4IMx MHMifZTKMTgTwIO0HqbUaOOhBvULYG+tyE5A31kloUxqksReaZEAp9Oy+f5g0zWz bVnqMHJQyi+/j+eu7qtHuexMznSiFXIA7sBDfr8QDWkwTBqYKCK4aVcG/u658yac 9xSLX8Md2pp9PSyV6Tl6FBo75GsslUyOXTFOCle5PDZYQhMAX3gfWljqyyCGltyz xtd6QR/GVvn5G029DMSfxPXuNLgxL8Cp5JMcDrF5TMb8eOnG/NLcCcSKvJWxAR6q l5bxQsfrCCagDSTbOXl4CZyYZ/2qUbZxZfniNYEwftWBfksIZamDHGBPQmspL4Hd upcKmefLEMGV0fVsKauN0FcyrTOr01ko7DO2zfoLMhfjGAYzdcGeckBWDngaqd8s 8E8M0eDjXc4up+9j6ZdYEGNhoz2zzTwmzKtm850scTfHsmej2wpDtNv7eCHRZE5A jh/k5/rgtF67LiRmWKFcqLl/O2rjOZRUuoKgyjLtshiXweD6bmc= =38iq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --jmnpe62yxqvsc2xq--