1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>) id 1WczIi-00055X-2M
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:41:32 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.223.178 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.223.178; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com;
helo=mail-ie0-f178.google.com;
Received: from mail-ie0-f178.google.com ([209.85.223.178])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WczIh-0001bj-EE
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:41:32 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id lx4so1042378iec.23
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.43.156.18 with SMTP id lk18mr2149552icc.77.1398267686144;
Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.127.243 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:41:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <5357DD8F.6050308@gmail.com>
References: <CANEZrP0szimdFSk23aMfO8p2Xtgfbm6kZ=x3rmdPDFUD73xHMg@mail.gmail.com>
<5357DD8F.6050308@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 17:41:26 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBjY4fTTQqkn6=NyU5Fm-54-CnFRHLdEL=3KsUeXBofTqA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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: 1WczIh-0001bj-EE
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Coinbase reallocation to discourage
Finney attacks
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: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 15:41:32 -0000
On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 5:34 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have some questions:
> 1. How can we work towards solving the double-spending problem?
We have this awesome technology that solves the double-spending
problem. It's called a blockchain. Of course, it only works when
transactions are actually in a block.
This issue is about double-spending preventing before they're
confirmed. This is (and has always been) just a best-effort mechanism
in the network.
> 2. Is it possible to "scan" for double-spending and correct it?
That is what is being proposed here, by introducing a mechanism where
miners can vote to penalize other miners if they seem to allow (too
many?) double spends.
> 3. Is the network at large not secure enough?
Not very relevant.
--
Pieter
|
