From: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect•com>
To: Kekcoin <kekcoin@protonmail•com>
Cc: "bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org"
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>,
Anthony Towns <aj@erisian•com.au>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable
Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2017 17:38:02 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <530153E9-1F86-4B21-A43D-72325EF1F811@taoeffect.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <lY1DxlDe2AacxKRcsB8DG2WvQK5wVnJdl46pE9Np9aGyTD560eDpJEvXZTNfKxSvulsGJOv3J4lrv14plchXfZh5JyYPLCNPATRMFUdu_h8=@protonmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2597 bytes --]
> Please read my email more carefully; the replay threat would be moot because there would be no alternative chain to replay the TX on,
In order to *get to that point*, you need >51%.
Not only that, but, if you started out with <51%, then you need >>51% in order to *catch up* and replace the large number of blocks added to the legacy chain in the mean time.
So, since >51% is _required_ for BIP148 to succeed (and likely >>51%)... you might as well do as SegWit did originally, or lower the threshold to 80% or something (as BIP91 does).
Without replay protection at the outset, BIP148, as far as I can tell, isn't a threat to miners.
--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.
> On Jun 6, 2017, at 5:29 PM, Kekcoin <kekcoin@protonmail•com <mailto:kekcoin@protonmail•com>> wrote:
>
> Please read my email more carefully; the replay threat would be moot because there would be no alternative chain to replay the TX on, as the non-148 chain would have been reorganized into oblivion.
>
>
> Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email.
>
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable
>> Local Time: June 7, 2017 3:26 AM
>> UTC Time: June 7, 2017 12:26 AM
>> From: contact@taoeffect•com <mailto:contact@taoeffect•com>
>> To: Kekcoin <kekcoin@protonmail•com <mailto:kekcoin@protonmail•com>>
>> Anthony Towns <aj@erisian•com.au <mailto:aj@erisian•com.au>>, bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>>
>>
>> I don't know what you mean by "render the replay threat moot."
>>
>> If you don't have replay protection, replay is always a threat. A very serious one.
>>
>> --
>> Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.
>>
>>> On Jun 6, 2017, at 5:19 PM, Kekcoin <kekcoin@protonmail•com <mailto:kekcoin@protonmail•com>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hmm, that's not the difference I was talking about. I was referring to the fact that using "post-chainsplit coinbases from the non-148 chain" to unilaterally (ie. can be done without action on the 148-chain) taint coins is more secure in extreme-adverserial cases such as secret-mining reorg attacks (as unfeasibly expensive they may be); the only large-scale (>100 block) reorganization the non-148 chain faces should be a resolution of the chainsplit and therefore render the replay threat moot.
>>>
>
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 7260 bytes --]
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-06-07 0:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-06-06 22:39 Tao Effect
2017-06-06 23:02 ` Gregory Maxwell
2017-06-06 23:12 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-07 13:25 ` Nick Johnson
2017-06-07 16:27 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-07 17:35 ` Nick Johnson
2017-06-08 5:44 ` Conner Fromknecht
2017-06-08 6:38 ` Nick Johnson
2017-06-06 23:08 ` Luke Dashjr
2017-06-06 23:19 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-06 23:20 ` Anthony Towns
2017-06-06 23:27 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-06 23:31 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-06 23:59 ` Kekcoin
2017-06-07 0:04 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-07 0:19 ` Kekcoin
2017-06-07 0:26 ` Tao Effect
2017-06-07 0:29 ` Kekcoin
2017-06-07 0:38 ` Tao Effect [this message]
2017-06-07 0:46 ` Kekcoin
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2017-06-06 20:43 Tao Effect
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=530153E9-1F86-4B21-A43D-72325EF1F811@taoeffect.com \
--to=contact@taoeffect$(echo .)com \
--cc=aj@erisian$(echo .)com.au \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kekcoin@protonmail$(echo .)com \
/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