From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd•org>
To: Greg Sanders <gsanders87@gmail•com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Solving Multi-Party Flows Pinning with Opt-in Full-RBF Spent-nVersion Signaling
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 10:33:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2J/zyeTh/rwekqe@petertodd.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAB3F3DsA3kNutwXGwamyyEgJN65rJt-0ks-ytuXP7jwjsjr8ug@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1402 bytes --]
On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 10:19:00AM -0400, Greg Sanders wrote:
> Sorry, I forgot one point which is pertinent to this conversation.
>
> *Even with* fullrbf-everywhere and V3, pinning via rule#3 and rule#5 are
> still an issue in coinjoin scenarios.
>
> Each coinjoin adversary can double-spend their coin to either full package
> weight(101kvb),
> or give 24 descendants, which means you quickly pay out the nose in rule#3
...and the attacker also pays out the nose if they're exploiting rule #3.
> or are excluded
> from RBFing it if you have 4+ greifers in your coinjoin violating rule#5.
>
> If we instead narrowed this policy to marking a transaction output as
> opt-in to V3, it gets a bit more interesting. *Unfortunately,
> double-spending counterparties can still cause rule#3 pain, one 100kvb
> package of junk per peer,* but rule#5 violations is at least contained to
> coinjoins with ~50 peers(assuming two transactions booted per input
> double-spent, which would be the V3 max bumped per input).
There's no hard technical reason for rule #5 to even exist. It's simply a
conservative DoS limit to avoid having to do "too much" computation when
processing a replacement in some replacement implementations. We shouldn't
assume it will always exist. And like rule #3 pinning, exploiting it costs
money.
--
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-02 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-02 2:21 Antoine Riard
2022-11-02 13:58 ` Greg Sanders
2022-11-02 14:04 ` Peter Todd
2022-11-02 14:19 ` Greg Sanders
2022-11-02 14:33 ` Peter Todd [this message]
2022-11-02 15:00 ` Greg Sanders
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=Y2J/zyeTh/rwekqe@petertodd.org \
--to=pete@petertodd$(echo .)org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=gsanders87@gmail$(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