public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Jorge Timón" <jtimon@jtimon•cc>
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph•org>,
	 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Getting around to fixing the timewarp attack.
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2018 15:48:16 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABm2gDoqG5RFJRdZ83WN6vU1=A3TMTy44heRV76-z=8Gk5doqA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRo5k8yBKXub46q7SQutskPKPmv5sXPZcM5+E_yzW5_mQ@mail.gmail.com>

I only knew about ArtForz's fix, which isn't backwards compatible.

https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/0.11...jtimon:hardfork-timewarp-0.11
https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0099.mediawiki#code


On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:14 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Since 2012 (IIRC) we've known that Bitcoin's non-overlapping
> difficulty calculation was vulnerable to gaming with inaccurate
> timestamps to massively increase the rate of block production beyond
> the system's intentional design. It can be fixed with a soft-fork that
> further constraints block timestamps, and a couple of proposals have
> been floated along these lines.
>
> I put a demonstration of timewarp early in the testnet3 chain to also
> let people test mitigations against that.  It pegs the difficulty way
> down and then churned out blocks at the maximum rate that the median
> time protocol rule allows.
>
> I, and I assume others, haven't put a big priority into fixing this
> vulnerability because it requires a majority hashrate and could easily
> be blocked if someone started using it.
>
> But there haven't been too many other network consensus rules going on
> right now, and I believe at least several of the proposals suggested
> are fully compatible with existing behaviour and only trigger in the
> presence of exceptional circumstances-- e.g. a timewarp attack.  So
> the risk of deploying these mitigations would be minimal.
>
> Before I dust off my old fix and perhaps prematurely cause fixation on
> a particular approach, I thought it would be useful to ask the list if
> anyone else was aware of a favourite backwards compatible timewarp fix
> proposal they wanted to point out.
>
> Cheers.
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev


  reply	other threads:[~2018-08-22 13:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-20 20:14 Gregory Maxwell
2018-08-22 13:48 ` Jorge Timón [this message]
2018-08-24  9:35 ` Johnson Lau
2018-08-30 20:55   ` Bram Cohen
2018-08-29  9:54 Zawy

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='CABm2gDoqG5RFJRdZ83WN6vU1=A3TMTy44heRV76-z=8Gk5doqA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=jtimon@jtimon$(echo .)cc \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=greg@xiph$(echo .)org \
    /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