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 AB1FC67 for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:07:24 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-wi0-f170.google.com (mail-wi0-f170.google.com [209.85.212.170]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EB09143 for ; Sun, 2 Aug 2015 22:07:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicgj17 with SMTP id gj17so81113384wic.1 for ; Sun, 02 Aug 2015 15:07:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=im63or+wkfGUxxoNJcfcfxBCZa37NIq+NBhNt4Vp9mA=; b=Amuc1+yYxOiW1dTZiN3lFZzFzHX8Obj+tV8CXAs8ou73y3+VQucYF3LOl96gbVMLIg VDyVBsSCyPAdIGGr15iECEzTkNNzus2ehiiqBc109p3ZI/ypoXzgVKfvcLc5lz8wX57B sR48j6wUKnbPNUPjLft8P1cpZ/9kzFs5NFWVg//Nv8isyKf/xXp/wG/+h2hdNERQTZsh 8C3mBlosafceW9tXfcDOg6p0bFJ8OPV3vqnItb1Vk0K7J4Dt648erFRuSsKENPTfFcRN P1VwFz3TLvz19wtTa3cN1VIvyhfisyP3XVUJW9oeuwR9aNiY3IPQUPqU1gF5J/mcYSdA 2wTQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.96.230 with SMTP id dv6mr27945105wib.23.1438553242129; Sun, 02 Aug 2015 15:07:22 -0700 (PDT) Sender: dscotese@gmail.com Received: by 10.27.184.134 with HTTP; Sun, 2 Aug 2015 15:07:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55BDF31D.1010803@mail.bihthai.net> References: <20150731083943.Horde.68uT9J78H_PdIgIwQP5frA1@server47.web-hosting.com> <55BDF31D.1010803@mail.bihthai.net> Date: Sun, 2 Aug 2015 15:07:22 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 23AB0JB7G7Abn3LFfA9xRWAWg3I Message-ID: From: Dave Scotese To: Bitcoin Dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04374917fcdd9f051c5b46f0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A compromise between BIP101 and Pieter's proposal X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:07:24 -0000 --f46d04374917fcdd9f051c5b46f0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 It will help to assume that there is at least one group of evil people who are investing in Bitcon's demise. Not because there are, but because there might be. So let's assume they are making a set of a billion transactions, or a trillion, and maintaining currently-being-legitimately-used hashing power. When block size is large enough to frustrate other miners, this hash power (or some piece of it) will be experimentally shifted to solving a block containing an internally consistent subset of the prepared trasnsactions to fill it - experimentally at first, but on the active Bitcoin network. One seemingly random, bloated, useless (except for the universal timestamp) block will be created and the evil group will measure the effect on the mining community - client takedowns, market exits, and whatever else interests them. Then they lie in wait, perhaps let out one more to do another experiment, but with the goal of eventually catching us unawares and doing as much damage to morale as possible. Good concrete descriptions of the threats against which we want to guard will be very helpful. Maybe there are already unit tests for such things or requests for miners' reactions to them (as opposed to just the software's behavior). My description might be a bit too long and perhaps not a very good example, but do we have a place where such examples can be constructed? While we will do our best to guard against such nightmares, it's also helpful to imagine what we will do if and when one of them ever actually occurs. Yes, I'm paranoid; because those who like to control everything are losing it. Dave On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 3:38 AM, Venzen Khaosan via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > +1 on every point, sipa > --f46d04374917fcdd9f051c5b46f0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
It will help to assume that there is a= t least one group of evil people who are investing in Bitcon's demise.= =C2=A0 Not because there are, but because there might be.=C2=A0 So let'= s assume they are making a set of a billion transactions, or a trillion, an= d maintaining currently-being-legitimately-used hashing power.=C2=A0 When b= lock size is large enough to frustrate other miners, this hash power (or so= me piece of it) will be experimentally shifted to solving a block containin= g an internally consistent subset of the prepared trasnsactions to fill it = - experimentally at first, but on the active Bitcoin network.=C2=A0 One see= mingly random, bloated, useless (except for the universal timestamp) block = will be created and the evil group will measure the effect on the mining co= mmunity - client takedowns, market exits, and whatever else interests them.= =C2=A0 Then they lie in wait, perhaps let out one more to do another experi= ment, but with the goal of eventually catching us unawares and doing as muc= h damage to morale as possible.

Good concrete descriptio= ns of the threats against which we want to guard will be very helpful.=C2= =A0 Maybe there are already unit tests for such things or requests for mine= rs' reactions to them (as opposed to just the software's behavior).= =C2=A0 My description might be a bit too long and perhaps not a very good e= xample, but do we have a place where such examples can be constructed?
<= br>
While we will do our best to guard against such nightmares, it'= ;s also helpful to imagine what we will do if and when one of them ever act= ually occurs.=C2=A0 Yes, I'm paranoid; because those who like to contro= l everything are losing it.

Dave

On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 3:38 AM, Venzen Khao= san via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation= .org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

+1 on every point, sipa

--f46d04374917fcdd9f051c5b46f0--