From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com>
To: John Dillon <john.dillon892@googlemail.com>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Anti DoS for tx replacement
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2013 00:55:20 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CA+8xBpf0Xsg7-zGSpk0jUZifVqg+gFCbj-+CaagsnD1cpN8nLA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPaL=UXDH=waCOUEg7pFJsFQmFU6U9K4WnezaPm-z8njmEFJDw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Apr 19, 2013 at 12:38 AM, John Dillon
<john.dillon892@googlemail.com> wrote:
> I understand that Gavin has spent effort on security efforts against
> small-scale attackers. It's the fact that he is so dismissive of the
> threat that large attackers play that is what bothers me. But if I am
> being divisive I understand.
I cannot speak for Gavin, but speaking more generally, large attackers
tend to belong in a thought-class all their own.
Example 1: if some super-ASIC miner arises with 90% of hash power,
and he starts behaving in a way contrary to the useful functioning of
bitcoin, the community might decide to change the PoW algorithm at
block height N.
Example 2: If someone large DDoS's the entire P2P network, which is
possible, manual intervention would be required to straighten out the
mess.
In each case, it's more about the community's mutual defense actions
than any prepared defense.
Speaking even more generally, bitcoin may be a billion-dollar
invention, but that doesn't mean it has any funding for network
defense! Unless cost structures and user attitudes change,
development and deployment of major defense strategies seems unlikely.
Which implies the community will simply wait for a [attack |
explosion | crisis], and then hope we can unwind/repair the damage
afterwards.
--
Jeff Garzik
exMULTI, Inc.
jgarzik@exmulti.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-19 4:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-16 17:39 [Bitcoin-development] Anti DoS for tx replacement Mike Hearn
2013-04-16 18:43 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-17 9:48 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-17 19:44 ` Alan Reiner
2013-04-18 6:07 ` John Dillon
2013-04-18 8:14 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-19 4:38 ` John Dillon
2013-04-19 4:55 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2013-04-18 8:32 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-18 9:04 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-18 9:28 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-18 9:32 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-18 9:28 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-18 9:34 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-18 10:08 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-18 10:19 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-18 13:37 ` Gavin Andresen
[not found] ` <CAD0SH_WOG8jQvzsNzwud3fYjaxqTJo0CS7yP6XZeKvap_yqtqg@mail.gmail.com>
2013-04-17 9:19 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-20 1:48 Jeremy Spilman
2013-07-18 11:13 ` Peter Todd
2013-07-18 12:53 ` Jeff Garzik
2013-07-18 13:43 ` Peter Todd
2013-07-18 16:09 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-20 20:51 Jeremy Spilman
2013-04-22 11:07 ` Mike Hearn
2013-04-23 12:40 ` John Dillon
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=CA+8xBpf0Xsg7-zGSpk0jUZifVqg+gFCbj-+CaagsnD1cpN8nLA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jgarzik@exmulti.com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=john.dillon892@googlemail.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