On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 07:19:06AM -0400, Peter Todd wrote: >Protocols aren't set in stone - any attacker that controls enough >hashing power to pose a 51% attack can simply demand that you use a >Bitcoin client modified [to facilitate evaluation of his policy]
Protocol voting is a vote per user policy preference, not a CPU vote, which is the point. Current bitcoin protocol is vulnerable to hard to prove arbitrary policies being imposable by a quorum of > 50% miners. The blind commitment proposal fixes that, so even an 99% quorum cant easily impose policies, which leaves the weaker protocol vote attack as the remaining avenue of attack. That is a significant qualitative improvement. The feasibility of protocol voting attacks is an open question, but you might want to consider the seeming unstoppability of p2p protocols for a hint. Adam ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ AlienVault Unified Security Management (USM) platform delivers complete security visibility with the essential security capabilities. Easily and efficiently configure, manage, and operate all of your security controls from a single console and one unified framework. Download a free trial. http://p.sf.net/sfu/alienvault_d2d _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
