This has been brought up several times in the past, and I agree with
Jonas' comments about users being unaware of the privacy losses due to
BIP37.  One thing also mentioned before but not int he current thread
is that the entire concept of SPV is not applicable to unconfirmed
transactions.  SPV uses the fact that miners have committed to a
transaction with work to give the user an assurance that the
transaction is valid; if the transaction were invalid, it would be
costly for the miner to include it in a block with valid work.

Transactions in the mempool have no such assurance, and are costlessly
forgeable by anyone, including your ISP.  I wasn't involved in any
debate over BIP37 when it was being written up, so I don't know how
mempool filtering got in, but it never made any sense to me.  The fact
that lots of lite clients are using this is a problem as it gives
false assurance to users that there is a valid but yet-to-be-confirmed
transaction sending them money.

-Tadge
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to