Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2022 15:35:20 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: darosior <darosior@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <YhFUiA9/YlY99Bok@petertodd.org>
References: <CAD5xwhik6jVQpP2_ss7d5o+pPLsqDCHuaXG41AMKHVYhZMXF1w@mail.gmail.com>
 <YgS3sJvg6kG3WnVJ@petertodd.org>
 <CAD5xwhi3Ja8gdU2h_6-1ck4kdU0TiC2Kx5O-61=f9=6JQSMs=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <YhAwr7+9mGJAe2/p@petertodd.org>
 <CAD5xwhi=sKckFZew75tZTogoeFABraWtJ6qMC+RgZjcirxYyZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <YhC6yjoe3bAfBS+W@petertodd.org>
 <kJWi5A4sc0UEU4JrtSg3gbR_M1UTp15XW3Oj5B5cQZQvygFn9pIqrxVxCU0sFjG5L05fqDFH6nz2PnU0sE_zVNMGsCXzmtJeDAc1kEYmYKA=@protonmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="AS4ZbKUrKwuvTFWN"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <kJWi5A4sc0UEU4JrtSg3gbR_M1UTp15XW3Oj5B5cQZQvygFn9pIqrxVxCU0sFjG5L05fqDFH6nz2PnU0sE_zVNMGsCXzmtJeDAc1kEYmYKA=@protonmail.com>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 lightning-dev <lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
 Jeremy <jlrubin@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev]  [Pre-BIP] Fee Accounts
Precedence: list


--AS4ZbKUrKwuvTFWN
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sat, Feb 19, 2022 at 05:20:19PM +0000, darosior wrote:
> > Necromancing might be a reasonable name for attacks that work by gettin=
g an
> > out-of-date version of a tx mined.
>=20
> It's not an "attack"? There is no such thing as an out-of-date transactio=
n, if
> you signed and broadcasted it in the first place. You can't rely on the f=
act that
> a replacement transaction would somehow invalidate a previous version of =
it.

Anyone on the internet can send you a packet; a secure system must be able =
to
receive any packet without being compromised. Yet we still call packet floo=
ds
as DoS attacks. And internet standards are careful to avoid making packet
flooding cheaper than it currently is.

The same principal applies here: in many situations transactions _do_ become
out of date, in the sense that you would rather a different transaction be
mined instead, and the out-of-date tx being mined is expensive and annoying.
While you have to account for the _possibility_ of any transaction you have
signed being mined, Bitcoin standards should avoid making unwanted necroman=
cy a
cheap and easy attack.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--AS4ZbKUrKwuvTFWN
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
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=3nxm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--AS4ZbKUrKwuvTFWN--