Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from <ronaldbelliott@gmail.com>) id 1Wwtug-0006vl-8k for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 13:59:02 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.216.172 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.216.172; envelope-from=ronaldbelliott@gmail.com; helo=mail-qc0-f172.google.com; Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com ([209.85.216.172]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Wwtud-0006dn-0z for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 13:59:02 +0000 Received: by mail-qc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id o8so9990086qcw.17 for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:58:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.140.80.67 with SMTP id b61mr13733566qgd.98.1403013533504; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.93.69 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.93.69 with HTTP; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:58:53 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <CA+8=xuKmE2rgNK+Q4g+Gqvy3QuYAXzVRYtWKC2VttuB_LJmyMA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CA+8=xuKmE2rgNK+Q4g+Gqvy3QuYAXzVRYtWKC2VttuB_LJmyMA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 06:58:53 -0700 Message-ID: <CAMEND1hS2j6dSjwvRSmVn_=UV-r7gujJ+Wo1VLH3nH54F3vBmQ@mail.gmail.com> From: Ron Elliott <ronaldbelliott@gmail.com> To: =?UTF-8?B?UmHDumwgTWFydMOtbmV6?= <rme@i-rme.es> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c13692479e6b04fc088b18 X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/) 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (ronaldbelliott[at]gmail.com) -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 X-Headers-End: 1Wwtud-0006dn-0z Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposals for improving Bitcoin mining decentralization X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 13:59:02 -0000 --001a11c13692479e6b04fc088b18 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In this scenario how do you ensure the miner solving the block cannot reapportion the subsidy to himself rather than the pool? On Jun 17, 2014 2:09 AM, "Ra=C3=BAl Mart=C3=ADnez" <rme@i-rme.es> wrote: > First of all I apologice due to the possible mistakes in my writing below= , > I am not a Bitcoin developer but I have some knowledge about it. > > ---- > > We all know the recent news, Ghash pool controlling 51% of the hashrate. > While some consider it a threat others think that is not harmful. > > The thing is that we have to do something to stop this from happening > again. > > My proposal is to start thinking about miners that join a pool like > independent miners and not slave miners, this includes creating a new > mining protocol that does not rely on the pool sending the list of > transactions to include in a block. Each individual miner has to collect > transactions by his own and mine that, this can be achieved by running a > full node or by running a SPV like node that ask other nodes for > transactions. > > Once this protocol is developed and standarised we as a community could > require all pools to use it (because its better, because is more > trustless...), not by imposing it but by recommending it. > > Pool owners could send some instructions using this protocol to the miner > about how many transactions to include per block (some pools want small > blocks), how many 0 fee transactions to include, how much is the minimum > fee per Kb to include transactions and some info about the Coinbase field > in the block. > > This way is impossible to perform some of the possible 51% attacks: > > - A pool owner cant mine a new chain (selfish mining) (pool clients > have a SPV or full node that has checkpoints and ask other peers about= the > length of the chain) > - A pool owner can't perform double spends or reverse transactions > (pool clients know all the transactions relayed to the network, they k= now > if they are already included on a block) > - A pool owner cant decide which transactions not to include (but they > can configure the minimum fee). > - A pool owner cant get all the rewards by avoiding other pools from > mining blocks (Because the pool client knows the last block independen= tly > that is from his pool or other). > > > The only thing that a 51% pool owner can do is to shut down his pool and > drop the hashrate by 51% because he does not control the miners. > > If the pool owner owns all the hardware in the pool my proposal is not > valid, if the pool clients dont use this protocol my proposal is not vali= d. > > > I want to know if this is possible or its been developed or there is > already a working protocol that works like this, also I want to read othe= r > people's ways to address this threat, thanks for reading. > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions > Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems > Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. > Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration > http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > --001a11c13692479e6b04fc088b18 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <p dir=3D"ltr">In this scenario how do you ensure the miner solving the blo= ck cannot reapportion the subsidy to himself rather than the pool?</p> <div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Jun 17, 2014 2:09 AM, "Ra=C3=BAl Mart=C3= =ADnez" <<a href=3D"mailto:rme@i-rme.es">rme@i-rme.es</a>> wrote= :<br type=3D"attribution"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin= :0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> <div dir=3D"ltr"><div>First of all I apologice due to the possible mistakes= in my writing below, I am not a Bitcoin developer but I have some knowledg= e about it.</div><div><br></div><div>----</div><div><br></div>We all know t= he recent news, Ghash pool controlling 51% of the hashrate. While some cons= ider it a threat others think that is not harmful.<div> <br></div><div>The thing is that we have to do something to stop this from = happening again.</div><div><br></div><div>My proposal is to start thinking = about miners that join a pool like independent miners and not slave miners,= this includes creating a new mining protocol that does not rely on the poo= l sending the list of transactions to include in a block. Each individual m= iner has to collect transactions by his own and mine that, this can be achi= eved by running a full node or by running a SPV like node that ask other no= des for transactions.</div> <div><br></div><div>Once this protocol is developed and standarised we as a= community could require all pools to use it (because its better, because i= s more trustless...), not by imposing it but by recommending it.</div> <div> <br></div><div>Pool owners could send some instructions using this protocol= to the miner about how many transactions to include per block (some pools = want small blocks), how many 0 fee transactions to include, how much is the= minimum fee per Kb to include transactions and some info about the Coinbas= e field in the block.</div> <div><br></div><div>This way is impossible to perform some of the possible = 51% attacks:</div><div><ul><li>A pool owner cant mine a new chain (selfish = mining) (pool clients have a SPV or full node that has checkpoints and ask = other peers about the length of the chain)</li> <li>A pool owner can't=C2=A0perform double spends or reverse transactio= ns (pool clients know all the transactions relayed to the network, they kno= w if they are already included on a block)</li><li>A pool owner cant decide= which transactions not to include (but they can configure the minimum fee)= .<br> </li><li>A pool owner cant get all the rewards by avoiding other pools from= mining blocks (Because the pool client knows the last block independently = that is from his pool or other).</li></ul><div><br></div></div><div>The onl= y thing that a 51% pool owner can do is to shut down his pool and drop the = hashrate by 51% because he does not control the miners.</div> <div><br></div><div>If the pool owner owns all the hardware in the pool my = proposal is not valid, if the pool clients dont use this protocol my propos= al is not valid.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>I want to know if = this is possible or its been developed or there is already a working protoc= ol that works like this, also I want to read other people's ways to add= ress this threat, thanks for reading.</div> </div> <br>-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------<br> HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions<b= r> Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems<br> Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data.<br> Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing & Easy Data Exploration<br= > <a href=3D"http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems" target=3D"_blank">http://p.sf.n= et/sfu/hpccsystems</a><br>_______________________________________________<b= r> Bitcoin-development mailing list<br> <a href=3D"mailto:Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net">Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net</a><br> <a href=3D"https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development= " target=3D"_blank">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment</a><br> <br></blockquote></div> --001a11c13692479e6b04fc088b18--