diff options
| author | Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> | 2022-07-12 09:29:47 +1000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2022-07-11 23:29:58 +0000 |
| commit | e8fc746481b870725549d7c269c4860ba07d4807 (patch) | |
| tree | 98c3fcc61e1255f51d0a5f49c0a6c7e89b7dbe3d | |
| parent | 2d72e4bbd8101bbab5d69138098bf72d79372aa3 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-e8fc746481b870725549d7c269c4860ba07d4807.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-e8fc746481b870725549d7c269c4860ba07d4807.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Security problems with relying on transaction fees for security
| -rw-r--r-- | 3e/c8e7fe376f49631a13e7f4690c7aa3267e5ebf | 84 |
1 files changed, 84 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/3e/c8e7fe376f49631a13e7f4690c7aa3267e5ebf b/3e/c8e7fe376f49631a13e7f4690c7aa3267e5ebf new file mode 100644 index 000000000..109a05316 --- /dev/null +++ b/3e/c8e7fe376f49631a13e7f4690c7aa3267e5ebf @@ -0,0 +1,84 @@ +Return-Path: <aj@erisian.com.au> +Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) + by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F1B6C002D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:58 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 46176403B7 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:58 +0000 (UTC) +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 46176403B7 +X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org +X-Spam-Flag: NO +X-Spam-Score: 2.498 +X-Spam-Level: ** +X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.498 tagged_above=-999 required=5 + tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, LOTS_OF_MONEY=0.001, MONEY_NOHTML=2.499, + SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] + autolearn=no autolearn_force=no +Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) + by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) + with ESMTP id fxDOh-r1WccC + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:56 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 +DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 2E94D4011D +Received: from azure.erisian.com.au (azure.erisian.com.au [172.104.61.193]) + by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E94D4011D + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:56 +0000 (UTC) +Received: from aj@azure.erisian.com.au (helo=sapphire.erisian.com.au) + by azure.erisian.com.au with esmtpsa (Exim 4.92 #3 (Debian)) + id 1oB2qe-0000Nk-2W; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 09:29:54 +1000 +Received: by sapphire.erisian.com.au (sSMTP sendmail emulation); + Tue, 12 Jul 2022 09:29:47 +1000 +Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 09:29:47 +1000 +From: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian.com.au> +To: Bram Cohen <bram@chia.net>, + Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Message-ID: <20220711232947.GC20899@erisian.com.au> +References: <CAHUJnBDYDbgr3C158o7c6_XXdG+kqJruFo=od_RmPFk_GS0udw@mail.gmail.com> +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii +Content-Disposition: inline +In-Reply-To: <CAHUJnBDYDbgr3C158o7c6_XXdG+kqJruFo=od_RmPFk_GS0udw@mail.gmail.com> +User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) +X-Spam-Score-int: -18 +X-Spam-Bar: - +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Security problems with relying on transaction + fees for security +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 23:29:58 -0000 + +On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 11:12:52AM -0700, Bram Cohen via bitcoin-dev wrote: +> If transaction fees came in at an even rate over time all at the exact same +> level then they work fine for security, acting similarly to fixed block +> rewards. Unfortunately that isn't how it works in the real world. + +That just becomes a market design question. There's been some trivial +effort put into that for bitcoin (ie, getting people to actually chooses +fees based on the weight of their transaction, and having weight be the +sole limiting factor for miners), but not a lot, and there's evidence +both from previous times in Bitcoin's history and from altcoin's that +the market can support higher fees. + +Should we work on that today, though? It doesn't seem smart to me: +the subsidy is already quite substantial ($6.5 billion USD per year at +current prices) so raising fees to 10% of block reward would transfer +another $650M USD from bitcoin users to miners (or ASIC manfucturers +and electricity producers) each year, achieving what? Refuting some FUD? + +Cheers, +aj + + |