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
|
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 1Uebp1-0007BO-1W
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 21 May 2013 01:57:03 +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 1Uebp0-0007pt-Cd
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 21 May 2013 01:57:03 +0000
Received: by mail-ie0-f178.google.com with SMTP id b11so223932iee.37
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 20 May 2013 18:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.42.65.75 with SMTP id k11mr121815ici.26.1369101417093; Mon,
20 May 2013 18:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.50.39.109 with HTTP; Mon, 20 May 2013 18:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+i0-i_+Tes+ePRqmDGEXDQ_L=S5y8gHBKk77zaLgTGOS3OMyA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <519AC3A8.1020306@quinnharris.me>
<CA+i0-i_+Tes+ePRqmDGEXDQ_L=S5y8gHBKk77zaLgTGOS3OMyA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 03:56:57 +0200
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBjmXyLkgfwzC8h+ZFkmyUf6nzbGo0oAWR9nsJOTOfOXEg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Robert Backhaus <robbak@robbak.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: 1Uebp0-0007pt-Cd
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Double Spend Notification
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, 21 May 2013 01:57:03 -0000
On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:24 AM, Robert Backhaus <robbak@robbak.com> wrote:
> So the decision has been made to make 0-conf double spends trivial, so no
> one will ever trust 0-confs. If a later transaction appears with a larger
> fee, it will be considered to be the valid one, and the first one dropped,
> as long as the first one has not been confirmed. This makes undoing a
> mistaken transaction possible.
This has been suggested, but I know of no such decision having been made.
--
Pieter
|
