From: Jeremy <jlrubin@mit•edu>
To: Antoine Riard <antoine.riard@gmail•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal to stop processing of unrequested transactions in Bitcoin Core
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 10:29:35 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhjGsB38otK5+H30XcnFnUdP+D29_k5=p2ZBgXzvdRRggw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALZpt+E6UqB5cew145PO2qiEMsELJ-TuGyE5PBL04T1tESiOiQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2057 bytes --]
I'm not sure of the existing behavior is of when we issue a getdata
request, but noting that there could be a privacy implication of this sort
of change. Could you (or someone else) expand on why this is not a concern
here?
--
@JeremyRubin <https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
<https://twitter.com/JeremyRubin>
On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 6:29 AM Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm proposing to stop the processing of unrequested transactions in
> Bitcoin Core 22.0+ at TX message reception. An unrequested transaction is
> one defined by which a "getdata" message for its specific identifier
> (either txid or wtxid) has not been previously issued by the node [0].
>
> This change is motivated by reducing the CPU DoS surface of Bitcoin Core
> around mempool acceptance. Currently, an attacker can open multiple inbound
> connections to a node and send expensive to validate, junk transactions.
> Once the canonical INV/GETDATA sequence is enforced on the network, a
> further protection would be to deprioritize bandwidth and validation
> resources allocation, or even to wither connections with such DoSy peers. A
> permissioned peer (PF_RELAY) will still be able to bypass such restrictions.
>
> Raw TX message processing has always been tolerated by Core and as such
> some Bitcoin clients aren't bothering with an INV/GETDATA sequence. Such
> change will break their tx-relay capabilities on the p2p network and
> require adaptation from them. Given deployment time of any release, I hope
> it provides a window time wide enough before the old tx-processing behavior
> becomes the minority.
>
> Eager to gather feedback on this proposal, especially if such change is
> deemed as too much constraining or fast on any Bitcoin software.
>
> Cheers,
> Antoine
>
> [0] See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/20277
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2951 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-02-11 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-02-10 13:13 Antoine Riard
2021-02-11 18:29 ` Jeremy [this message]
2021-02-11 21:15 ` Pieter Wuille
2021-02-12 11:49 ` Antoine Riard
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='CAD5xwhjGsB38otK5+H30XcnFnUdP+D29_k5=p2ZBgXzvdRRggw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=jlrubin@mit$(echo .)edu \
--cc=antoine.riard@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.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