| 00:19:33 | phantomcircuit: | ffs |
| 00:19:39 | phantomcircuit: | bought a cable modem |
| 00:19:41 | phantomcircuit: | no coax cable |
| 02:59:48 | maaku: | merged mining attack I hadn't considered : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=394388.0 |
| 03:01:42 | maaku: | somone solo mining altcoin could double-count proof-of-work by merge mining the fraud chain against their solo blocks |
| 03:06:32 | gmaxwell: | maaku: namecoin ended up deploying a specific defense against this |
| 03:06:42 | gmaxwell: | that requires the namecoin chain to be at a particular position |
| 03:09:49 | maaku: | gmaxwell: i'm aware of that one - it protects against having multiple auxblock committments in the same coinbase |
| 03:10:11 | maaku: | but the twist here is namecoin merged mined against namecoin |
| 03:10:45 | maaku: | so the attacker has the choice of using the outer block or the inner block |
| 03:11:06 | warren: | maaku: wouldn't that only be an issue in practice if the value of NMC were much higher? |
| 03:12:26 | maaku: | warren: eh? it depends on the size of the double-spend you are trying to make |
| 03:13:30 | Niko_B: | Get some easy bitcoins all you need is a web browser http://t.co/RFLekya7Hc |
| 03:13:37 | maaku: | the fact that you can build up he public chain, while double-counting work towards a secret attack violates some security assumptions |
| 03:14:13 | maaku: | * maaku needs to learn how to use +o |
| 03:14:13 | gmaxwell: | maaku: oh I don't think you can mergemine namecoin against namecoin. |
| 03:14:20 | warren: | warren has kicked Niko_B from #bitcoin-wizards |
| 03:15:07 | maaku: | gmaxwell: yeah i'm not certain if it'd actually work.. but this wasn't something I'd previously thought about |
| 03:15:09 | gmaxwell: | maaku: if you can thats dumb and should be fixed, but its a purely academic attack right now since you'd have to forgo substantial bitcoin income. |
| 03:15:15 | maaku: | and it would have worked in the system I was designing |
| 03:15:22 | maaku: | it's easily fixed though |
| 03:15:26 | gmaxwell: | should be trivial to fix if so— just don't accept non-mergedmined blocks. |
| 03:16:42 | maaku: | yeah |
| 07:10:42 | gmaxwell: | brisque: it could be made possible with some modest design changes. |
| 07:11:00 | gmaxwell: | https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=21995.0 |
| 07:15:00 | _ingsoc: | _ingsoc (~ingsoc@unaffiliated/ingsoc/x-8595135) has quit (Quit: leaving) |
| 07:16:15 | brisque: | gmaxwell: that's interesting. for old blocks that would presumably get resource intensive though. |
| 07:17:27 | gmaxwell: | hm? |
| 07:17:49 | gmaxwell: | brisque: I would only expect nodes to retain the data structure as of the tip. |
| 07:18:00 | gmaxwell: | (to reorg they would keep undo data, like we do for blocks) |
| 07:20:06 | brisque: | yep, I follow. |
| 07:20:37 | brisque: | at this point I'm convinced that you've written a post on the forum about every topic conceivable, it's just buried in bitcointalk nonsense. |
| 07:28:44 | CodeShark: | yeah, agreed, brisque - it would be nice to organize all of gmaxwell's forum posts into a coherent reference :) |
| 07:29:19 | CodeShark: | I just don't have time nor focus to sift through all the forum crap |
| 07:30:49 | brisque: | CodeShark: I'd read that, maybe a coffee table book of failed altcoins too |
| 07:33:50 | gmaxwell: | I've actually considered hiring someone to do that. |
| 07:34:00 | gmaxwell: | (to go index everything I've written and make summaries) |
| 07:35:31 | brisque: | damn, I was getting excited for the coffee table book. |
| 07:37:43 | brisque: | gmaxwell: provided all of your 3000 posts aren't almost BIPs in length, I'd be happy to do that though if you wanted. they're usually quite interesting reads unto themselves. |
| 07:39:46 | brisque: | gmaxwell: I particularly enjoy that you used interrobangs in 2011. |
| 07:54:40 | brisque: | andytoshi: nothing important was said anyway, just me being impressed by gmax'wells crazy punctuation. |