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
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
|
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 <pete@petertodd.org>) id 1WI9pt-0006s7-Hg
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:41:41 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of petertodd.org
designates 62.13.149.43 as permitted sender)
client-ip=62.13.149.43; envelope-from=pete@petertodd.org;
helo=outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk;
Received: from outmail149043.authsmtp.co.uk ([62.13.149.43])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WI9ps-0005W2-DL for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:41:41 +0000
Received: from mail-c237.authsmtp.com (mail-c237.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.237])
by punt17.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id s1P4fY8h044499
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:41:34 GMT
Received: from savin (76-10-178-109.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.178.109])
(authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id s1P4fOc0059500
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO)
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 25 Feb 2014 04:41:26 GMT
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2014 23:41:16 -0500
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Message-ID: <20140225044116.GA28050@savin>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="/04w6evG8XlLl3ft"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 1685daa0-9dd7-11e3-94fa-002590a135d3
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVJwpGK10IU0Fd
P1hXKl1LNVAaWXld WiVPGEoXDxgzCjYj NEgGOBsDNw4AXQB1
Jh0bXVBSFQF4ARgL Ah8UUB48cANYeX5u ZEFqQHFbVVt/fUFi
QwAXFA0CMxgzaGAa WUVYd01RcAZCMB5D YlUrBSINfGxTMn19
RlY+ZHVgYTtWbXwN GFxcdVtLGhsHRSgS Sh1KES8oBSUA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1024:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 76.10.178.109/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-)
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
X-Headers-End: 1WI9ps-0005W2-DL
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Fee drop
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, 25 Feb 2014 04:41:41 -0000
--/04w6evG8XlLl3ft
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
So, just to be clear, we're adding, say, a memory limited mempool or
something prior to release so this fee drop doesn't open up an obvious
low-risk DDoS exploit.... right? As we all know, the network bandwidth
DoS attack mitigation strategy relies on transactions we accept to
mempools getting mined, and the clearance rate of the new low-fee
transactions is going to be pretty small; we've already had problems in
the past with mempool growth in periods of high demand. Equally it
should be obvious to people how you can create large groups of low-fee
transactions, and then cheaply double-spend them with higher fee
transactions to suck up network bandwidth - just like I raised for the
equally foolish double-spend propagation pull-req.
Of course, there's also the problem that we're basically lying to people
about whether or not Bitcoin is a good medium for microtransactions.
It's not. Saying otherwise by releasing software that has known and
obvious DoS attack vulnerabilities that didn't exist in the previous
version is irresponsible on multiple levels.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000b28e2818c4d8019fb71e33ec2d223f5e09394a89caccf4e2
--/04w6evG8XlLl3ft
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.14 (GNU/Linux)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==
=X+3t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--/04w6evG8XlLl3ft--
|
