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
|
Return-Path: <gcbd-bitcoin-development-2@m.gmane.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB8B5BAF
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 19 Jun 2017 20:49:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from blaine.gmane.org (unknown [195.159.176.226])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 169AD1A6
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 19 Jun 2017 20:49:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <gcbd-bitcoin-development-2@m.gmane.org>)
id 1dN3br-0005Of-Ft for bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org;
Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:49:19 +0200
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@schildbach.de>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 22:49:17 +0200
Message-ID: <oi9dc8$iv3$1@blaine.gmane.org>
References: <CAO3Pvs8ccTkgrecJG6KFbBW+9moHF-FTU+4qNfayeE3hM9uRrg@mail.gmail.com>
<oi8e8k$g56$1@blaine.gmane.org>
<537fb7106e0387c77537f0b1279cbeca@cock.lu>
<55482016.LADLl5KXAH@strawberry>
<4052F361-966C-4817-9779-146D4B43D1FE@jonasschnelli.ch>
<oi8sdn$ksl$1@blaine.gmane.org>
<B27FF856-9281-479C-BFE2-D594F46C5C44@jonasschnelli.ch>
<CAKEeUhha8FMYqO79veAyZyg0Cc6S-_1a4=k4=6WdC7+Juk1A1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/52.1.1
In-Reply-To: <CAKEeUhha8FMYqO79veAyZyg0Cc6S-_1a4=k4=6WdC7+Juk1A1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_ALL,
FORGED_MUA_MOZILLA,RDNS_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Compact Client Side Filtering for
Light Clients
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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, 19 Jun 2017 20:49:31 -0000
Most SPV wallets make it quite clear that unconfirmed transactions are
just that.
On 06/19/2017 06:36 PM, adiabat via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> This has been brought up several times in the past, and I agree with
> Jonas' comments about users being unaware of the privacy losses due to
> BIP37. One thing also mentioned before but not int he current thread
> is that the entire concept of SPV is not applicable to unconfirmed
> transactions. SPV uses the fact that miners have committed to a
> transaction with work to give the user an assurance that the
> transaction is valid; if the transaction were invalid, it would be
> costly for the miner to include it in a block with valid work.
>
> Transactions in the mempool have no such assurance, and are costlessly
> forgeable by anyone, including your ISP. I wasn't involved in any
> debate over BIP37 when it was being written up, so I don't know how
> mempool filtering got in, but it never made any sense to me. The fact
> that lots of lite clients are using this is a problem as it gives
> false assurance to users that there is a valid but yet-to-be-confirmed
> transaction sending them money.
>
> -Tadge
>
|
