It is vulnerable to sybil attacks or where the recipient is a victim of a
proxy attack.  If the recipient is not connected to a valid Network, then
double spends could be allowed.

 as long as this protocol is intended for use of transactions around a
dollar or so I don't see that being a financially lucrative attack.

However consider a large department store.  If I put a "fence" around that
store and control all of its outbound peer connections, I can then allow
double spends for the duration of my visit at the store.

In order to defend against this large retailers would have to use
distributed / trusted nodes and certificates.











On Thu, Jun 17, 2021, 4:14 PM raymo via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hi,
> I have a proposal for improve Bitcoin TPS and privacy, here is the post.
>
> https://raymo-49157.medium.com/time-to-boost-bitcoin-circulation-million-transactions-per-second-and-privacy-1eef8568d180
> https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5344020.0
> Can you please read it and share your idea about it.
>
> Cheers
> Raymo
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>