public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: Jonathan Toomim <j@toom.im>, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] On the security of softforks
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 2015 14:44:25 +1030	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <878u4poixq.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E76D5BF9-41BF-4AF5-BBAC-06F4EF574EBE@toom.im>

Jonathan Toomim via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
writes:
> On Dec 18, 2015, at 10:30 AM, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> 1) The risk of an old full node wallet accepting a transaction that is
>> invalid to the new rules.
>> 
>> The receiver wallet chooses what address/script to accept coins on.
>> They'll upgrade to the new softfork rules before creating an address
>> that depends on the softfork's features.
>> 
>> So, not a problem.
>
>
> Mallory wants to defraud Bob with a 1 BTC payment for some beer. Bob
> runs the old rules. Bob creates a p2pkh address for Mallory to
> use. Mallory takes 1 BTC, and creates an invalid SegWit transaction
> that Bob cannot properly validate and that pays into one of Mallory's
> wallets. Mallory then immediately spends the unconfirmed transaction
> into Bob's address. Bob sees what appears to be a valid transaction
> chain which is not actually valid.

Pretty sure Bob's wallet will be looking for "OP_DUP OP_HASH160
<pubKeyHash> OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG" scriptSig.  The SegWit-usable
outputs will (have to) look different, won't they?

Cheers,
Rusty.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2015-12-20 18:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-18  2:30 [bitcoin-dev] On the security of softforks Pieter Wuille
2015-12-18  2:47 ` Jonathan Toomim
2015-12-18  3:02   ` Eric Lombrozo
2015-12-18 12:18     ` Peter Todd
2015-12-19 15:48       ` Bryan Bishop
2015-12-18  3:10   ` jl2012
2015-12-18  5:32     ` Jorge Timón
2015-12-18  6:12   ` Anthony Towns
2015-12-19  1:36   ` Chris
2015-12-19 17:46   ` Andrew
2015-12-20  4:14   ` Rusty Russell [this message]
2015-12-20 19:16     ` jl2012

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=878u4poixq.fsf@rustcorp.com.au \
    --to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=j@toom.im \
    --cc=pieter.wuille@gmail.com \
    /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