From: Stefan Thomas <moon@justmoon•de>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Duplicate transactions vulnerability
Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:00:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F4E91FC.6030003@justmoon.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBhb+gYMwp1OJuCHYt5=BU63=YBWOFaLLthHBkN_U-scaA@mail.gmail.com>
> The purpose of this mail is asking for support for adding this rule to
> the protocol rules. If there is consensus this rule is the solution, I
> hope pools and miners can agree to update their nodes without lengthy
> coinbase-flagging procedure that would only delay a solution. So, who
> is in favor?
Looks good to me. I also second the notion that we should deploy this
quickly, given that it's a bug fix.
On 2/28/2012 5:48 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> as some of you may know, a vulnerability has been found in how the
> Bitcoin reference client deals with duplicate transactions. Exploiting
> it is rather complex, requires some hash power, and has no financial
> benefit for the attacker. Still, it's a security hole, and we'd like
> to fix this as soon as possible.
>
> A simple way to fix this, is adding an extra protocol rule[1]:
>
> Do not allow blocks to contain a transaction whose hash is equal to
> that of a former transaction which has not yet been completely spent.
>
> I've written about it in BIP30[2]. There is a patch for the reference
> client, which has been tested and verified to make the attack
> impossible. The change is backward compatible in the same way BIP16
> is: if a supermajority of mining power implements it, old clients can
> continue to function without risk.
>
> The purpose of this mail is asking for support for adding this rule to
> the protocol rules. If there is consensus this rule is the solution, I
> hope pools and miners can agree to update their nodes without lengthy
> coinbase-flagging procedure that would only delay a solution. So, who
> is in favor?
>
> [1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Protocol_rules
> [2] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0030
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-02-29 21:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-02-28 16:48 Pieter Wuille
2012-02-28 17:12 ` Brautigam Róbert
2012-02-28 17:18 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-02-28 18:10 ` Gavin Andresen
2012-02-28 18:23 ` Luke-Jr
2012-02-28 20:24 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-02-28 20:35 ` Ben Reeves
2012-02-29 1:41 ` Zooko Wilcox-O'Hearn
2012-02-29 16:47 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-02-29 17:02 ` Amir Taaki
2012-02-29 21:00 ` Stefan Thomas [this message]
2012-02-29 22:05 ` Ben Reeves
2012-02-29 22:38 ` Matt Corallo
2012-02-29 22:46 ` Gavin Andresen
2012-02-29 23:00 ` Ben Reeves
[not found] ` <20120229232029.GA6073@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
2012-02-29 23:45 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-03-01 10:15 ` Ben Reeves
2012-03-01 13:09 ` Ben Reeves
2012-03-01 14:27 ` Gregory Maxwell
2012-03-01 17:20 ` Ben Reeves
2012-03-01 14:30 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-03-02 1:56 ` Pieter Wuille
2012-03-03 16:41 ` Pieter Wuille
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=4F4E91FC.6030003@justmoon.de \
--to=moon@justmoon$(echo .)de \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/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