On Monday 04 October 2021 16:14:20 Antoine Riard wrote: > > The "dust limit" is arbitrarily decided by each node, and cannot be > > relied upon for security at all. Expecting it to be a given default value > > is in itself a security vulnerability > > Reality is that an increasing number of funds are secured by assumptions > around mempool behavior.
In other words, simply not secured. > And sadly that's going to increase with Lightning growth and deployment of > other L2s. L2s shouldn't build on flawed assumptions. > Maybe we could dry-up some policy rules in consensus like the dust limit > one :) No thanks. Not sure that would even help (since policies can always be set to a higher dust limit than any consensus rule) _______________________________________________ Lightning-dev mailing list Lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
