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
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E490BBA1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:59:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148093.authsmtp.net (outmail148093.authsmtp.net
[62.13.148.93])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8075D1F7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:59:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt16.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t6FFx81X012946;
Wed, 15 Jul 2015 16:59:08 +0100 (BST)
Received: from savin.petertodd.org (75-119-251-161.dsl.teksavvy.com
[75.119.251.161]) (authenticated bits=128)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t6FFx45B022010
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Wed, 15 Jul 2015 16:59:07 +0100 (BST)
Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:59:03 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Me <jimmyjack@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150715155903.GC20029@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <24662b038abc45da7f3990e12a649b8a@airmail.cc>
<55A66FA9.4010506@thinlink.com>
<20150715151825.GB20029@savin.petertodd.org>
<CDB5FC27-F3F0-44F7-BBC6-670ACAE740D2@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="f+W+jCU1fRNres8c"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CDB5FC27-F3F0-44F7-BBC6-670ACAE740D2@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: 6c9f84df-2b0a-11e5-b397-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdwcUEkAYAgsB AmMbWlJeVVR7WWQ7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
VklWR1pVCwQmRRp3 cFYaV2tydQdGeX4+ ZEZkXHgVWhdzI055
FhhJFz8GNHphaTUa TRJbfgRJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
FQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpg CjoMIlQTT0cAFzgg DxQFBi4iBgUPVm0/
KAEsLlNZB14cNEkz N1RpRFQTNBkcCxdb Ek0vSDNDLl8aTiE3 DARcRiYA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1023:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 75.119.251.161/587
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Significant losses by double-spending unconfirmed
transactions
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Wed, 15 Jul 2015 15:59:12 -0000
--f+W+jCU1fRNres8c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 08:49:13AM -0700, Me wrote:
> > Blockcypher's "confidence factor" model(1)
> > under the hood - yet another one of those sybil attacking network
> > monitoring things
>=20
>=20
> Peter, I noticed on your twitter you have a lot of bad things to say abou=
t Blockcypher and their business model (which I might not full agree, but t=
otally respect), can you share any evidence they perform any form of Sybil =
attack on the network, please.=20
For Blockcypher to succesfully do what they claim to do they need to
connect to a large % of nodes on the network; that right there is a
sybil attack. It's an approach that uses up connection slots for the
entire network and isn't scalable; if more than a few services were
doing that the Bitcoin network would become significantly less reliable,
at some point collapsing entirely.
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
0000000000000000093f699ccdb323aa638af1131249ec2e1bacbf367163807a
--f+W+jCU1fRNres8c
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQGrBAEBCACVBQJVpoNCXhSAAAAAABUAQGJsb2NraGFzaEBiaXRjb2luLm9yZzAw
MDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwMDAwOTNmNjk5Y2NkYjMyM2FhNjM4YWYxMTMxMjQ5ZWMyZTFi
YWNiZjM2NzE2MzgwN2EvFIAAAAAAFQARcGthLWFkZHJlc3NAZ251cGcub3JncGV0
ZUBwZXRlcnRvZC5vcmcACgkQJIFAPaXwkfsvRQgAiNG+bUGo3+XUQSk214d70Yfp
3IjlctdfpiW2cPh7YEYGsf2GkApaRkxkH/5sU12kpK3DYP3P3o7RW1bvF5kss5rD
98THTjsuv8DS6ZM2+H2JgzQwJzqGivzGFAxz8mnvzf/Y7G9lhsZP6Uo9U2+jcL/f
iMhwCdwAL/WEbvZgBalhnz+sJIJ8J1w6Rs6JkhiRIDIA/XJvsrXYuy3p7UqJi8o3
dEOWN+WKEr/bc99h/yPDQAwIDIrtZ7jJt5lZO6ZvQ1RNM3/sPywzO3ZseyDYFHyI
n8c8JWDvflFU1PeiqO4mRQRqwbHl8gniVlCPM3EgfWDAp/azoB2BjGl0mihQrw==
=Ixnu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--f+W+jCU1fRNres8c--
|
