On Fri, Feb 12, 2016 at 10:31:56PM +1100, gladoscc via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Here's a method of fixing block withholding attacks with a soft fork:
So, while you're technique I believe works, it's not a soft-fork, at least under the definition most of the Bitcoin dev/research community have been using. The reason is if it's adopted by a majority of hashing power, less than a majority of hashing power can create a chain that appears to be the most-work chain, from the perspective of non-adopting nodes. Those nodes would then be following a weaker chain. A better term for what you're proposing might be a "pseudo-soft-fork", given that you don't quite meet the requirements for a true soft-fork. Having said that, it may be the case that overall your technique still reduces risk compared to a simpler hard-fork implementation of the idea; more analysis is needed there. -- https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org 000000000000000006d243cee301d792809a7d4d00c13ac24b43d5e9548625e4
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
