Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2023-05-09 🗒️ Summary of this message: A proposal to ...
📅 Original date posted:2023-05-09
🗒️ Summary of this message: A proposal to add a "padding" rule to Bitcoin transactions to prevent dust attacks may not be effective as users can easily evade it.
📝 Original message:On 5/9/23 09:32, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> obviously it's easy enough to evade if every non-economic user simply > keeps enough bitcoin around and sends it back to himself > > so
maybeit's a useless idea? but maybe that's enough of a hassle to stop >
people (it certainly breaks ordinals, since it can never be 1 sat)
Padding the change is not just a hassle, it requires holding extra BTC
in a hot wallet, which has a cost.
Spenders could also get around the rule by paying miners off-network,
but having to do so would be an appropriate penalty for broadcasting a
non-economic transaction.
🗒️ Summary of this message: A proposal to add a "padding" rule to Bitcoin transactions to prevent dust attacks may not be effective as users can easily evade it.
📝 Original message:On 5/9/23 09:32, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> obviously it's easy enough to evade if every non-economic user simply > keeps enough bitcoin around and sends it back to himself > > so
maybeit's a useless idea? but maybe that's enough of a hassle to stop >
people (it certainly breaks ordinals, since it can never be 1 sat)
Padding the change is not just a hassle, it requires holding extra BTC
in a hot wallet, which has a cost.
Spenders could also get around the rule by paying miners off-network,
but having to do so would be an appropriate penalty for broadcasting a
non-economic transaction.