From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Xiwdx-0005Qv-DY for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:36:21 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.223.170 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.223.170; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-ie0-f170.google.com; Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com ([209.85.223.170]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Xiwdw-000292-Qr for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:36:21 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id tp5so5750821ieb.15 for ; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:36:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.66.179 with SMTP id g19mr1366221igt.8.1414463775536; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:36:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.107.159.3 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:36:15 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <544EFEE8.4000000@thinlink.com> References: <544EA3D7.2050901@thinlink.com> <544EA85E.8010400@bluematt.me> <544EFEE8.4000000@thinlink.com> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:36:15 +0000 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Tom Harding Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Xiwdw-000292-Qr Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] DS Deprecation Window X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:36:21 -0000 On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 2:26 AM, Tom Harding wrote: > Matt, > > You're right, thanks. Without double-spend relay, miner won't know that > some txes conflict with anything. Even with that, the miner cannot tell, his only safe option is to include no transactions at all. Consider a malicious miner can concurrently flood all other miners with orthogonal double spends (which he doesn't mine himself). These other miners will all be spending some amount of their time mining on these transactions before realizing others consider them double-spends.