summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/ee/1927b0435bf3696165198e23128ebe1c53975a
blob: e86ef30adea1aed781e442b83998b581bdc043ab (plain)
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
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1UFBNM-0000jb-EB
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 11 Mar 2013 22:39:24 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.214.174 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.214.174; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ob0-f174.google.com; 
Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174])
	by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1UFBNL-0000nw-7I
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Mon, 11 Mar 2013 22:39:24 +0000
Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id 16so3896067obc.33
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.60.22.69 with SMTP id b5mr10827901oef.38.1363041557883; Mon,
	11 Mar 2013 15:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.76.86.169 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Mar 2013 15:39:17 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <513E59EE.7070605@gmail.com>
References: <20130310043155.GA20020@savin>
	<CABOyFfp9Kd+y=SofWfq6TiR4+xeOhFL7VVHWjtrRn83HMsmPBA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T1rt+7BQHz1S=NVtL_YV7kfCapQ+3MEf+xyXT7pZOfq7w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABOyFfrO9Xpc=Pdh_6AM1yoHRCeuHxzqL02F-ALkimmsGbheiA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABOyFfqh_VixG7SQMaQUkxU40MGY1f9JO3=OqwitHa1YoT4chQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP0gsrd2W3ODfQRSc2k5V7GotJ0vzEAxcAjnaMtDHZ9_JA@mail.gmail.com>
	<75F78378-7580-4D69-A5EA-E943AF7CEB0C@benlabs.net>
	<513E2BC6.2050102@gmail.com>
	<CANEZrP1tYTDf6k76=jcBL+10MpCgemV2TP=wZiRuA02vhUP78A@mail.gmail.com>
	<513E59EE.7070605@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 23:39:17 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: M6-C-Z_ZjI1abDYaH7s6mNT_CwM
Message-ID: <CANEZrP26L5Gv5kPcYCqEoSNgKFvuePdKfx6_dJyxuA3DZ5cAEA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: =?UTF-8?Q?Tadas_Varanavi=C4=8Dius?= <tadas.varanavicius@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	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: 1UFBNL-0000nw-7I
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Blocking uneconomical UTXO creation
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: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 22:39:24 -0000

> Isn't there danger of an attack if UTXO is not stored in fast storage?

RAM is used as a database cache.

But regardless, what kind of attack are you thinking of? Using up all
available disk seeks by sending a node a lot of fake transactions that
connect to unspent outputs, but have invalid transactions? You'll get
yourself disconnected and the IP banned even with todays code.

It's much easier to hose a node by just asking it to send you the
block chain. Watch your own node when something is syncing the chain
from it. Ping times go through the roof because there's only one
network thread. If you're worried about DoS attacks on Bitcoin, it'd
be better to fix that first.