Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Z63dc-0003R1-L6 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 21:15:48 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.218.50 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.218.50; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-oi0-f50.google.com; Received: from mail-oi0-f50.google.com ([209.85.218.50]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Z63db-00087j-KK for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 21:15:48 +0000 Received: by oiyy130 with SMTP id y130so71528148oiy.0 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:15:42 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=mcZJlrutze6x0rjaGUv1FZSS18rbbvS7NpVphJv6Xig=; b=HSySH5lISHyhNnYJJDG6kWxX9x/5iZqb4vHvsXXaVFs39gQDixXZNKCXXZ9Gq5aPi6 Oo2j22JDGGMge9DFlDGNkRBT7tdOpQ+KLI0rU6OxuUtMMIWvdM3hJ9g1cfqVYNn/JZ8R pImy3Yi5nAqRHEcrwhDqFowWULCkmHaOIeDxg6seDO1hAIwfFvadqjcSdRjLvxeUwD+1 G2OO7QxOLu+gvAv+6uhjwxeXIdUtmyle7XdB2hHVouXDpL5rgUshQ7kfnq+w03HIEpc3 +m8A9jTK9XI34ZISgfic2qB68QxE7jtFLfWgBRuFSqJrCgl3+q73NldpU8NmUwRl5Fku X/Aw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkg0b583yakJ8bh1LhDVccQvfj1pamvIZq5Ufe4fKkPTzqMJJE7KQC2b5DTMVbj839vIbeY X-Received: by 10.202.74.10 with SMTP id x10mr14359693oia.98.1434748542058; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:15:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.108.149 with HTTP; Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:15:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20150619103959.GA32315@savin.petertodd.org> <20150619154054.GA13498@savin.petertodd.org> <6716121.uS5ifrNBZv@crushinator> From: Jeff Garzik Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 14:15:21 -0700 Message-ID: To: Frank Flores Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1134fa14311ad90518e56d6c X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.1 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1Z63db-00087j-KK Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] F2Pool has enabled full replace-by-fee X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2015 21:15:48 -0000 --001a1134fa14311ad90518e56d6c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Double spend detection is by definition best-effort. The purpose of bitcoin is to provide security (confirmations) to otherwise insecure, possibly double spent transactions. On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Frank Flores wrote: > Has anyone from Mycelium weighed in on this? Is their doublespend attack > detection broken with this kind of irresponsible behavior? > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Matt Whitlock > wrote: > >> On Friday, 19 June 2015, at 9:18 am, Adrian Macneil wrote: >> > If full-RBF sees any significant adoption by miners, then it will >> actively >> > harm bitcoin adoption by reducing or removing the ability for online or >> POS >> > merchants to accept bitcoin payments at all. >> >> Retail POS merchants probably should not be accepting vanilla Bitcoin >> payments, as Bitcoin alone does not (and cannot) guarantee the >> irreversibility of a transaction until it has been buried several blocks >> deep in the chain. Retail merchants should be requiring a co-signature from >> a mutually trusted co-signer that vows never to sign a double-spend. The >> reason we don't yet see such technology permeating the ecosystem is >> because, to date, zero-conf transactions have been irreversible "enough," >> but this has only been a happy accident; it was never promised, and it >> should not be relied upon. >> >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >> > > > > -- > *MONEY IS OVER!* > IF YOU WANT IT > > ===================================================== > The causes of my servitude can be traced to the tyranny of money. > -Serj Tankian > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ --001a1134fa14311ad90518e56d6c Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Double spend detection is by definition best-effort.
<= br>
The purpose of bitcoin is to provide security (confirmations)= to otherwise insecure, possibly double spent transactions.

<= /div>



On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 2:05 PM, Frank Flores <fr= ankf44@gmail.com> wrote:
Has anyone from Mycelium weighed in on this? Is their double= spend attack detection broken with this kind of irresponsible behavior?

On Fri, Jun 19, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Matt Whitlock &l= t;bip@mattwhitlo= ck.name> wrote:
On Friday, = 19 June 2015, at 9:18 am, Adrian Macneil wrote:
> If full-RBF sees any significant adoption by miners, then it will acti= vely
> harm bitcoin adoption by reducing or removing the ability for online o= r POS
> merchants to accept bitcoin payments at all.

Retail POS merchants probably should not be accepting vanilla Bitcoin payme= nts, as Bitcoin alone does not (and cannot) guarantee the irreversibility o= f a transaction until it has been buried several blocks deep in the chain. = Retail merchants should be requiring a co-signature from a mutually trusted= co-signer that vows never to sign a double-spend. The reason we don't = yet see such technology permeating the ecosystem is because, to date, zero-= conf transactions have been irreversible "enough," but this has o= nly been a happy accident; it was never promised, and it should not be reli= ed upon.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/= listinfo/bitcoin-development



<= /div>--
MONEY IS OVER!
=C2=A0=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0IF YOU WANT IT
=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D
The causes of my servitude can be traced to the tyranny of money.-Serj Tankian

-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------

_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/= listinfo/bitcoin-development




--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open sourc= e evangelist
BitPay, Inc. =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0https://bitpay.com/
--001a1134fa14311ad90518e56d6c--