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
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
|
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 A80E5B3D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 4 Jul 2015 05:22:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk (outmail148154.authsmtp.co.uk
[62.13.148.154])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA1AC7C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 4 Jul 2015 05:22:18 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c235.authsmtp.com (mail-c235.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.235])
by punt15.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id t645MEPH092645;
Sat, 4 Jul 2015 06:22:14 +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 t645MAan061157
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO);
Sat, 4 Jul 2015 06:22:12 +0100 (BST)
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 2015 01:22:09 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Raystonn <raystonn@hotmail.com>
Message-ID: <20150704052209.GB12225@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <COL402-EAS66A7496C6F4E67B0C99998CD950@phx.gbl>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="i0/AhcQY5QxfSsSZ"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <COL402-EAS66A7496C6F4E67B0C99998CD950@phx.gbl>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Server-Quench: a07e5942-220c-11e5-b397-002590a15da7
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aQdMdgYUEkAYAgsB AmMbW1JeUl97WGA7 bA9PbARUfEhLXhtr
VklWR1pVCwQmRRoF A2NvA0dycQRHfXk+ ZEJlWngVDUR9IEN0
RkxJF28GNnphaTUa TRJbfgRJcANIexZF O1F6ACIKLwdSbGoL
FQ4vNDcwO3BTJTpg Ci8KN1FaRkhDHzgi ThQDEX0lGUoORD57
IwErYkIbVGwwChts eUUgXlYRLx4VDBY2
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] Fork of invalid blocks due to BIP66 violations
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: Sat, 04 Jul 2015 05:22:19 -0000
--i0/AhcQY5QxfSsSZ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 10:17:38PM -0700, Raystonn wrote:
Yeah, I was really surprised when I found out today that bitcoinj
doesn't implement any of the soft-fork code. There's no excuse for not
doing that frankly. :(
> <p dir=3D"ltr">SPV clients are at risk in scenarios like this. We should=
encourage them to check node versions against the minimum required for saf=
ety. This check should be upgraded when new BIPs go into effect. It won't=
help against malicious nodes. But it will help in cases such as today's.<=
br>
> </p>
> <div class=3D"gmail_quote">On 3 Jul 2015 8:17 pm, Gregory Maxwell <gma=
xwell@gmail.com> wrote:<br type=3D'attribution'><blockquote class=3D"quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
>=20
>=20
>=20
> <div>
> <div>On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Raystonn <raystonn@hotmail.co=
m> wrote:<br />
> > We need some analysis on why this has happened.=A0 It appears the la=
rger hashrate is violating BIP66.=A0 Thus it appears the network is rejecti=
ng this BIP, though potentially accidentally.=A0 If this is an accident, ho=
w is such a large portion of hashrate forking, and what can we do to avoid =
this in the future?<br />
> <br />
> A near majority of the hashrate on the network appears to be SPV mining.<=
br />
> <br />
> Btcnuggets was a non-upgraded miner that produced an invalid block<br />
> after the lock in and f2pool and antpool have been extending it.<br />
> Fortunately their extension contains no transactions (an artifact of<br />
> SPV mining).=A0 Obviously a complete understanding is going to take some<=
br />
> time;=A0 though I would note that this general failure mode was one we<br=
/>
> were aware of and is part of the reason the treshold is so high.<br />
> </div>
> </div>
>=20
> </blockquote></div>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--=20
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000014870ea5d966efbae21588be363949de7cb3838f42b00e2f
--i0/AhcQY5QxfSsSZ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----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=XQEn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--i0/AhcQY5QxfSsSZ--
|
