Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

From: Tejaswi Nadahalli <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2020 12:44:59 +0200

On Fri, Jul 3, 2020 at 12:17 PM ZmnSCPxj <[email-masked]> wrote:

>
> > In fact, one rule of thumb might be that wherever watchtowers are
> required, a timelocked bribe might be possible.
>
> I think a better heuristic is that, if the logic of the construction
> assumes "transaction with earlier locktime supersedes transaction with
> later locktime", then it is timelocked-bribery-vulnerable.
>

That's true by definition. Timelocked bribes are, well, going to be
possible when there are timelocks. I was going more for an "indirect clue"
that wherever a watchtower is proposed, a timelocked bribe is possible.
This is entirely a pedantic point :-)