BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: busygin on February 11, 2014, 03:05:11 am
-
Considering that it made so much noise today, would it be possible to get some comments on whether transaction malleability will exist in bitshares world? The three possibilities are yes (txid will work same way as in bitcoin), no (txid never changes when a transaction goes from mempool to a block), or irrelevant (txid is not created at all). Which one is the case?
-
I think BTCe did best: 102 USD/BTC :)
Can someone explain how/if Transaction Malleability affects Bitshares PTS and X?
https://www.mtgox.com/press_release_20140210.html
It could effect BitShares PTS, but not BitShares X as I use an entirely different code base that doesn't have this particular issue.
-
Thanks! Sorry that I missed that comment from bytemaster.
BTW, it could be an additional marketing point for Bitshares X.
-
BTW, it could be an additional marketing point for Bitshares X.
No, honestly concern over transaction malleability is an indicator of weak knowledge of how bitcoin really works. Nobody worth taking seriously thinks it's an issue, it's been on the sidelines for over 2 years for a reason.
-
Yeah, after reading up a bit on the topic it seems like Mt. Gox is using it as a cheap excuse for their own incompetence.
-
BTW, it could be an additional marketing point for Bitshares X.
No, honestly concern over transaction malleability is an indicator of weak knowledge of how bitcoin really works. Nobody worth taking seriously thinks it's an issue, it's been on the sidelines for over 2 years for a reason.
So, it looks like transaction malleability is not completely harmless after all. By malling lots of transactions someone creates a glut of double-spends in the bitcoin network now. Either way, it's better not to give this option to attackers, and I think that mentioning no-malleability of Bitshares X for marketing purposes would be good.
-
If a single media outlet ever mentions this issue 1 month from now then I will concede
-
BTW, it could be an additional marketing point for Bitshares X.
No, honestly concern over transaction malleability is an indicator of weak knowledge of how bitcoin really works. Nobody worth taking seriously thinks it's an issue, it's been on the sidelines for over 2 years for a reason.
So, it looks like transaction malleability is not completely harmless after all. By malling lots of transactions someone creates a glut of double-spends in the bitcoin network now. Either way, it's better not to give this option to attackers, and I think that mentioning no-malleability of Bitshares X for marketing purposes would be good.
This glut of attempted double-spending would not be any worse than "Enjoy Sochi" spams and hardly worth a mention if the exchanges affected were programmed properly. No real double-spending is possible via "mauling transactions".
BTW: What's a good verb for this stuff? Kneading? Mauling? Malling? Reforming?