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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7F23C0001
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 18 May 2021 11:58:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88B0F402CD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 18 May 2021 11:58:56 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.302
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.302 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id rcWCZqATE_Jx
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 18 May 2021 11:58:55 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40135.protonmail.ch (mail-40135.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.135])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D9105402C1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 18 May 2021 11:58:54 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 18 May 2021 11:58:44 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail; t=1621339132;
bh=rcJx8I0CaZ4Hxps1dstZP2Je/PmZ1DFRDrp+nBByx88=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=B584tbHYtAYzBGWnRqGYqe20AqdEbJtEXJZnxoGDAq6LPc/EBTCoRue+7xxWUq3wW
ueNlHIFugAjpqGsOgOczirrV4T0n0/O0polKzAetDon4PHssmrI1op4ZBnM4Ef0evB
lPqaaN4CFLwadcmnClW45zR31yb3cLQN5O4qHWW0=
To: "mike@powx.org" <mike@powx.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <vTGmO3qpvd7XawxARg2vvWmeP2LOCLAIBgMRWmNNmf7mok0DRhIes5JsBnooflSNk4DX2vQCuOB7hBmSjcUT_RvtF6l8gJ9Tt69TWEeowmg=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <03AA32FD-5AC0-42B0-B6D3-387BDC2B4238@powx.org>
References: <U-U9RmD3wRndUuQkzjsqm5X8BNnGKcxiIJs-fWbPMiGNaiSlENL4Yn4Ui8vUseIMse_rzgzBmV6EfkdROHEuPbA9vgf7Fkq39Hr9cs-zZbs=@protonmail.com>
<03AA32FD-5AC0-42B0-B6D3-387BDC2B4238@powx.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposal: Low Energy Bitcoin PoW
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 18 May 2021 11:58:56 -0000
Good morning Michael,
> That=E2=80=99s interesting. I didn=E2=80=99t know the history of ASICBOOS=
T.
History is immaterial, what is important is the technical description of AS=
ICBOOST.
Basically, by fixing the partial computation of the second block of SHA256,=
we could selectively vary bits in the first block of SHA256, while reusing=
the computation of the second block.
This allows a grinder to grind more candidate blocks without recomputing th=
e second block output, reducing the needed power consumption for the same n=
umber of hashes attempted.
Here is an important writeup: https://www.mit.edu/~jlrubin/public/pdfs/Asic=
boost.pdf
It should really be required reading for anyone who dreams of changing PoW =
algorithms to read and understand this document.
There may be similar layer-crossings in any combined construction --- or ev=
en just a simple hash function --- when it is applied to a specific Bitcoin=
block format.
>
> Our proposal (see Implementation) is to phase in oPoW slowly starting at =
a very low % of the rewards (say 1%). That should give a long testing perio=
d where there is real financial incentive for things like ASICBOOST
>
> Does that resolve or partially resolve the issue in your eyes?
It does mitigate this somewhat.
However, such a mechanism is an additional complication and there may be fu=
rther layer-crossing violations possible --- there may be an optimization t=
o have a circuit that occasionally uses SHA256d and occasionally uses oPoW,=
that is not possible with a pure SHA256d or pure oPoW circuit.
So this mitigation is not as strong as it might appear at first glance; add=
itional layers means additional possibility of layer-crossing violations li=
ke ASICBOOST.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
