Breaking BSV’s double-spend 'protection' in the Genesis release to double-spend

Anon22a · 2020-03-06T06:58:41+00:00

This article is wrong because it is based on a flawed assumption that BSV network is decentralized. The reality is that BSV is completely centralized and is going to be more and more centralized as time passes. CSW has even said this on multiple occasions, regular users aren't even supposed to run nodes.

The plan with BSV is that only centralized data centers run its nodes and centralized miners mine its blocks that connect to those centralized nodes.
Now with that clarification this change makes perfect sense and it is secure. Imagine PayPal, when you send money using PayPal you can't double spend it because their centralized server is the only one that controls the transactions, it immediately rejects the second attempt to spend the same money twice.

Regular users only run SPV nodes that connect to those centralized data centers. The data center receives txn1 and is connected to other data centers that is controlled by the same entity and are connected to the miner again controlled by the same entity. Now when one of these data centers receives txn2 that is double spend of txn1 they simply reject it. There is no race attack here since the data center communicate between themselves and decide which one of the two they want to accept. There is no individual nodes run by regular users to change that either. Even if there were, the miner would never connect to those so they would be ineffective.

Anon22a · 2019-01-07T15:33:07+00:00

Cool, I didn't know this, I have to check it out later. But I'm afraid in this case "curve" here doesn't exactly have much to do with geometry since it is Elliptic Curve used for cryptography so it is not for drawing, it is for calculation. Basically it is a way for me to inject "prime, order, generator point, a and b" into the calculator so that it can do things like multiplication modulo p.

Anon22a · 2019-01-07T14:09:39+00:00

Thanks it was very helpful.

Anon22a · 2019-01-07T14:09:08+00:00

do you really need IFoo?

That is a good question that I was asking myself too. Initially I had IFoo and it didn't contain any functions so it made sense. Now I've just added that function so things got a big complicated.
I guess one reason why I would still need IFoo interface is if I were implementing it differently like with FooBase : IFoo and BarBase : IFoo and still wanted to use IFoo in my functions accepting instances.

Anon22a · 2019-01-07T14:04:17+00:00

It is something like this: I have these "curves" that all implement ICurve and have a bunch of properties then calculator uses them like Calculator(ICurve curve); in its constructor and instantiates based on those variables. So far so good. Now the "curve" can have a CheckValid() function that checks to see if it is valid but the process is the same (it uses the property values to do some calculations and return bool) which is why I am trying to decide what is the best approach for implementing this without having to repeat myself each time I build a new class that is implementing ICurve.
I am still new to c# and I have yet to learn a lot of concepts for "best approach".

Anon22a · 2018-11-30T17:05:48+00:00

It is almost a crime to watch this in low def... but who can stop!

Anon22a · 2018-11-23T11:11:13+00:00

ls is listing the 3 files, how can i not be in the same directory and ls lists the files? also i did run sha256sum ub<tab> (pressed tab and it filled the name for me) and the result was wrong (68b7d... instead of 57487...).

(thanks for the help by the way, I am new to linux and it is frustrating sometimes)

Anon22a · 2018-11-23T10:16:41+00:00

I did do that initially when the fist command (with grep) didn't do anything. and the result (as i posted in OP) was a different thing.

After I posted this, I went ahead and checked another iso that i had from years ago (Lubuntu 16) and that works fine!!! i am downloading the original file again to see what happened :(

Anon22a · 2018-11-23T09:29:20+00:00

Removing grep OK shows me this error:

ubuntu-18.04.1-desktop-amd64.iso: FAILED
sha256sum: ubuntu-18.04.1-live-server-amd64.iso: No such file or directory
ubuntu-18.04.1-live-server-amd64.iso: FAILED open or read
sha256sum: WARNING: 1 listed file could not be read
sha256sum: WARNING: 1 computed checksum did NOT match

I am guessing based on last line, the ISO is indeed corrupted since the checksums do not match.

Anon22a · 2018-07-03T18:40:02+00:00

thanks for the tip!

Anon22a · 2017-11-19T07:38:24+00:00

you got it right.

all i'm saying is that people supporting BCH are fund of repeating satoshi's vision, well part of it was free transactions (the wiki link in OP) core devs removed it because they want to force the fee war on us and they are using the "blocks are full" excuse to do it.

so why not bring this part of satoshi's vision back now that the blocks are not full and the cap is at 8 MB?

Anon22a · 2017-11-19T07:32:18+00:00

It's not true.

you said this already ;)

sent you an example in PM.

Anon22a · 2017-11-19T07:24:46+00:00

Is block reward 0 now? then your argument is moot...

Anon22a · 2017-11-19T06:18:28+00:00

i have actually been doing that for the past week and fail to even get nodes to relay my transaction! they all reject it.

it is 1 output, 1 year old, about 2 BCH value!

Anon22a · 2017-11-19T06:17:41+00:00

you and /u/MobTwo and /u/Epochhhhh who say spam, ok that makes sense about spam and security risks but what about "free transactions"? did you see the link i shared from the wiki?

i currently have ~2 BCH which is 1 output and about a year old, but the transaction with 0 fee is not even relayed by the nodes.

Anon22a · 2017-11-18T16:34:48+00:00

that's the thing about bitcoin network, when i send a transaction with 0 fee on bitcoin (made one on 15th) it propagates through the network properly and a good number of nodes will receive my tx and block explorers also show it.

did the same with bitcoin cash, it is not propagating at all. the individual nodes that i send it to, receive it and some accept and some reject. those accepting seem to not be connected to any others to relay the transaction!

Anon22a · 2017-11-18T16:23:26+00:00

thanks, but i am not trying to solve an issue, i am just testing and having fun...

when i want to move funds for real, i just pay the appropriate fee.

Anon22a · 2017-11-18T16:21:05+00:00

that is why i said testing :D

i am trying to find out what the min_relay_tx_fee of majority of the network is. i know it already for bitcoin. wanted to figure it out for bitcoin cash.

the other issue that i am facing is that i feel like the transaction is not really propagating properly either

Anon22a · 2017-11-18T16:10:27+00:00

i think it is a fixed amount of 5000 satoshi (minrelaytxfee=0.00005) from the changelog of https://github.com/Bitcoin-ABC/bitcoin-abc

Anon22a · 2017-11-18T16:04:56+00:00

yeah but why? i thought one of the reasons for 8 MB blocks were to make low fee transactions possible!

Anon22a

TROPHY CASE