> Hi all, > > Hope everyone had great holidays and is enjoying the new year so far. I > wrote up a first description of the chain syncing algos we may use and I'd > love reviews and feedback: > > https://github.com/ignopeverell/grin/blob/master/doc/chainsync.md > > I have mixed feelings about the full node mode. While archival is > desirable for later checks (included from new nodes), we would get > stronger privacy guarantees if cut-through still happened on full nodes. I > think the "right to be forgotten" is an important part of the design. Any > strong opinion either way? > > Thanks, > Igno-- > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~mimblewimble > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~mimblewimble > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >
Greetings Ignotus Peverell, The described chain sync document would certainly aid in the rate which new nodes can be synced to the head block in the network, but would the immutablity of the chain not be dependent on how large the block horizon is? If I understand correctly, say an adversary wants to rewrite the blockchain instead of forking from genesis they would only need to fork at H - Z block and rewrite history from there. Since nodes are only concerned with H - Z blocks this makes the block history much more trivial to rewrite. For this to be an adequate solution we would need to determine how large of a block horizon would be deemed safe and "unattackable" from an adversial standpoint. Feel free to correct me if I am misunderstanding something here. Regards, Gellert Grindelwald -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~mimblewimble Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~mimblewimble More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
