[bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

2020-06-23 Thread Stanga via bitcoin-dev
Hi all, We'd like to bring to your attention our recent result concerning HTLC. Here are the technical report and a short post outlining the main points: * https://arxiv.org/abs/2006.12031 * https://ittayeyal.github.io/2020-06-22-mad-htlc Essentially, we find that HTLC security relies on miners

Re: [bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

2020-06-23 Thread Stanga via bitcoin-dev
Hi ZmnSCPxj, Thank you for taking the time to respond, these are very good points. Responses inline. On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:48 PM ZmnSCPxj wrote: > Good morning Itay, Ittay, and Matan, > > I believe an unstated assumption in Bitcoin is that miners are > short-sighted. > > The reasoning for

Re: [bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

2020-06-23 Thread Stanga via bitcoin-dev
Of course the order at the end should have been switched: Consider first the case where Alice *does not* publish preimage "A": Bob can safely publish preimage "B" and get both the Deposit and Collateral tokens after the timeout. Now, consider the case where Alice *publishes* preimage "A": If Bob p

Re: [bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

2020-06-30 Thread Stanga via bitcoin-dev
Hi ZmnSCPxj, That's a good point. Basically there are two extremes, if everyone is non-myoptic (rational), they should wait even for a small fee (our mad-htlc result), and if everyone else is myopic (rational), a non-myopic miner should only wait for a fairly large fee, depending on miner sizes an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] MAD-HTLC

2020-07-05 Thread Stanga via bitcoin-dev
Hi ZmnSCPxj, 1. If all miners are rational and non-myopic, they will support the attack. They don't need to cooperate, it's not the end of Bitcoin, but they all have to know everyone is rational and non-myopic. If you want to be secure in a situation like this then mad-htlc helps. Otherwise you ca