On Tuesday, 26 May 2015, at 11:22 am, Danny Thorpe wrote:
> What prevents RBF from being used for fraudulent payment reversals?
> Pay 1BTC to Alice for hard goods, then after you receive the goods
> broadcast a double spend of that transaction to pay Alice nothing? Your
> only cost is the higher network fee of the 2nd tx.

The "First-Seen-Safe" replace-by-fee presently being discussed on this list 
disallows fraudulent payment reversals, as it disallows a replacing transaction 
that pays less to any output script than the replaced transaction paid.

Bitcoin-development mailing list

Reply via email to