Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

I don't normally post here, but I'm sorry, if you don't see those two as equal, then I think you have misunderstood the *entire* value proposition of cryptocurrencies. The state of any cryptocurrency should entirely (and only) be defined by its ledger. If the state of the system can be altered out

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 6:44 AM Conner Fromknecht wrote: > I don't normally post here, but I'm sorry, if you don't see those two as > equal, then I think you have misunderstood the *entire* value proposition > of cryptocurrencies. > > The state of any cryptocurrency should entirely (and only) be d

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 5:27 PM Tao Effect wrote: > Nick, > > Please don't spread misinformation. Whatever you think of the DAO hard > fork, it's a simple fact that the Ethereum ledger was not edited. > > > This sort of email is unhelpful to this conversation, and it certainly > doesn't help with

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

Nick, > Please don't spread misinformation. Whatever you think of the DAO hard fork, > it's a simple fact that the Ethereum ledger was not edited. This sort of email is unhelpful to this conversation, and it certainly doesn't help with the perception that Ethereum is nothing but a bunch of hypo

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

On Wed, Jun 7, 2017 at 12:02 AM Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > > I believe the severity of replay attacks is going unvoiced and is not > > understood within the bitcoin commun

[bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

This is just me putting in my formal objection to BIP148 and BIP149 based on my experience with the ETH/ETC hard fork and involvement in that drama. First, it's important to note that ETC/ETH HF is a very different situation from BIP148 and all other soft-forks. To those on this mailing list, th

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

protection in case of medium-to-long-term chainsplits in general. If you fail to grok, please read again until you don't. Sent with [ProtonMail](https://protonmail.com) Secure Email. Original Message Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untenn

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

il more carefully; the replay threat would be moot because > there would be no alternative chain to replay the TX on, as the non-148 chain > would have been reorganized into oblivion. > > > Sent with ProtonMail <https://protonmail.com/> Secure Email. > >> ---- Or

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable Local Time: June 7, 2017 3:26 AM UTC Time: June 7, 2017 12:26 AM From: cont...@taoeffect.com To: Kekcoin Anthony Towns , bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org I don't know what you mean by "render the replay t

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

I don't know what you mean by "render the replay threat moot." If you don't have replay protection, replay is always a threat. A very serious one. -- Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA. > On Jun 6, 2017, at 5:19 PM, Kekcoin

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

- Original Message ---- Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable Local Time: June 7, 2017 3:04 AM UTC Time: June 7, 2017 12:04 AM From: cont...@taoeffect.com To: Kekcoin Anthony Towns , bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org You keep referring to 148 coinbase

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

> You keep referring to 148 coinbase coins, what is the rationale behind this? > Why would you prefer using 148 coinbases over legacy coinbases for this > purpose? OK, maybe "post-UASF coinbase coins" is a better term? I just wanted to make it clear that this refers to coins that come from bloc

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable Local Time: June 7, 2017 2:27 AM UTC Time: June 6, 2017 11:27 PM From: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org To: Anthony Towns bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org CoinJoin works as a method of both improving fungibility and mixing with coinbase transactions

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

> CPFP can be used by an attacker to get your original txn into the 148 chain. *err, my bad that's unlikely to happen, if I remember correctly CPFP can only be done by the person you're sending the coins to. Coin-mixing seems the better option of the two, but shouldn't the BIP148 folks wait unti

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

> CoinJoin works as a method of both improving fungibility and mixing with > coinbase transactions. My understanding is that the two situations are quite different. Unlike mixing to coin-split, CoinJoin doesn't create a high demand exclusively for coinbase transactions. However, of the proposed

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

> Replay is a solved problem. Point to this solved problem? Your "solution" here is not a solution: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/6f1urd/i_think_its_time_we_have_an_educated_discussion/diey21t/?context=3

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

Hey Greg, It wasn't my intention to insult anyone (a bit defensive?). Maybe this is yet another example of a recurring criticism of Core: that core doesn't community these issues very well to journalists / reports / media / community outside of this list. Because outside of this list it's been

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

On Tue, Jun 06, 2017 at 03:39:28PM -0700, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev wrote: > - Mixing with 148 coinbase txns destroys fungibility. CoinJoin works as a method of both improving fungibility and mixing with coinbase transactions. You probably don't need to do anything clever to split a coin though:

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

On Tuesday 06 June 2017 10:39:28 PM Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I believe the severity of replay attacks is going unvoiced and is not > understood within the bitcoin community because of their lack of > experience with them. Replay is a solved problem. It can be improved on and made simple

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 10:39 PM, Tao Effect via bitcoin-dev wrote: > I believe the severity of replay attacks is going unvoiced and is not > understood within the bitcoin community because of their lack of experience > with them. Please don't insult our community-- the issues with replay were poi

[bitcoin-dev] Replay attacks make BIP148 and BIP149 untennable

This is just me putting in my formal objection to BIP148 and BIP149 based on my experience with the ETH/ETC hard fork and involvement in that drama. First, it's important to note that ETC/ETH HF is a very different situation from BIP148 and all other soft-forks. To those on this mailing list, th