They do not run anything but BitcoinJ (evidenced by them blindly following invalid chains), so no proper consensus checking going on here at all. Connected to my nodes is a bad peer (doesn’t relay inventory but downloads everything) from 37.187.136.15, with the user agent /BitcoinJ:0.12SNAPHOT/Satoshi:0.2.0/ which is owned by blockchain.info. You can also submit an invalid transaction through their /pushtx interface and get a mixture of noise and BitcoinJ error messages out of it as well.

If even the people who have to their claim hundreds of thousands of wallets are relying on their security don’t bother running even a single node to sanity check against, who are we really going to expect people to in the future if the load goes 8x, 16x, 32x higher? Like CoinBase and others, these are the companies which are claimed will be the ones supporting the network with ludicrous sized blocks because they have a financial incentive to.

Well, they don't even do it now when it could be achieved with a $5 VPS.


> Sent: Friday, July 24, 2015 at 8:43 PM
> From: "Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> To: "Thomas Zander" <thomas@thomaszander.se>
> Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bitcoin Roadmap 2015, or "If We Do Nothing" Analysis
> We can test the fact that blockchain.info's wallet and block explorer
> has behaved in a way consistent with not running a full node - they have
> shown invalid data that any full node would reject on multiple
> occasions, most recently invalid confirmations during the BIP66 fork.

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev