From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@monetize•io>
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] To prevent arbitrary data storage in txouts — The Ultimate Solution
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:27:08 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130411112708.GA1006@savin> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAC1+kJOM=QrK4w5O-sqH=CV30v7KCxBZPBS9c+p12XK5UsJ2iw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1316 bytes --]
On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 05:58:10PM +0200, Jorge Timón wrote:
> On 4/10/13, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org> wrote:
> > Oh, and while we're at it, long-term (hard-fork) it'd be good to change
> > the tx hash algorithm to extend the merkle tree into the txouts/txins
> > itself, which means that to prove a given txout exists you only need to
> > provide it, rather than the full tx.
> >
> > Currently pruning can't prune a whole tx until every output is spent.
> > Make that change and we can prune tx's bit by bit, and still be able to
> > serve nodes requesting proof of their UTXO without making life difficult
> > for anyone trying to spent old UTXO's. The idea is also part of UTXO
> > proof stuff anyway.
>
> I thought about this before, I like the idea very much.
> Would such a fork be controversial for anyone?
> Would anyone oppose to this for some reason I'm missing?
You mean https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=137933.0 ?
I would oppose it, and I wrote the above proposal. The code required to
implement UTXO fraud proofs is more complex than the entire Bitcoin code
base; obviously that much new fork-critical code opens up huge technical
risks. As an example, can you think of how UTXO fraud proofs can cause
an arbitrarily deep re-org?
--
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-04-11 11:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-04-10 2:53 Gregory Maxwell
2013-04-10 3:03 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-10 3:08 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-10 15:58 ` Jorge Timón
2013-04-11 11:27 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2013-04-10 6:53 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-10 7:15 ` Gregory Maxwell
2013-04-10 7:29 ` Peter Todd
2013-04-10 3:52 ` Robert Backhaus
2013-04-10 3:58 ` Gregory Maxwell
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=20130411112708.GA1006@savin \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=jtimon@monetize$(echo .)io \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
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