From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA72B26C for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:26:52 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from outmail149112.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail149112.authsmtp.co.uk [62.13.149.112]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DD1787 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:26:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-c232.authsmtp.com (mail-c232.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.232]) by punt21.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u7S8QnvM023341; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:26:49 +0100 (BST) Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com [52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u7S8Qk6I037513 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 28 Aug 2016 09:26:47 +0100 (BST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F46F400B1; Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:23:27 +0000 (UTC) In-Reply-To: References: <20160824014634.GA19905@fedora-21-dvm> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 From: Peter Todd Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 04:37:29 +0000 To: James MacWhyte , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Message-ID: <82507740-C4A3-4AF2-BA02-3B29E5FECDE4@petertodd.org> X-Server-Quench: 298e7efb-6cf9-11e6-829e-00151795d556 X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at: http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR aQdMdAoUGUATAgsB AmAbW11eUlt7XWs7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq T0pMXVMcUQILCX1a AGceUR53dgYIfHl4 ZwhgV3gOWxEsJ1t7 ERhdCGwHMGF9YGIW BV1YdwJRcQRDe0tA b1YxNiYHcQ5VPz4z GA41ejw8IwAXAy1N Qx0EKRo/T0gKFT8x QQxKPTIpEFwdQDko ZwNhYhQnF0ELOUU/ PRMMUEgEM1VaJgpD FUVAGzdUIVUAQSVj NRldQUMVDDxaR08E X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1037:706 X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255) X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25 X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own anti-virus system. X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=no version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Jeff Coleman Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Capital Efficient Honeypots w/ "Scorched Earth" Doublespending Protection X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2016 08:26:52 -0000 On 24 August 2016 22:54:47 GMT-04:00, James MacWhyte wrote: >I've always assumed honeypots were meant to look like regular, yet >poorly-secured, assets. Not at all. Most servers have zero reason to have any Bitcoin's accessible via them, so the presence of BTC privkeys is a gigantic red flag that they are part of a honeypot. > If the intruder could identify this as a >honeypot >by the strange setup (presigned, non-standard transactions lying >around) >and was aware that the creator intended to doublespend as soon as the >transaction was discovered, wouldn't they instead prefer to not touch >anything and wait for a non-bait target to appear? Re-read my last section on the "scorched earth" disincentive to doublespend the intruder.