[Bitcoin-development] The relationship between Proof-of-Publication and Anti-Replay Oracles

Peter Todd pete at petertodd.org
Sun Dec 21 15:32:41 UTC 2014


On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 03:11:32PM +0800, Mark Friedenbach wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 21, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Peter Todd <pete at petertodd.org> wrote:
> 
> > Right, so Freimarkets is deliberately insecure.
> >
> 
> Please define your terms, particularly what your security requirements are
> here. In the architecture we created users remain in control of their funds
> at all times, and miners have incentives to mine the host chain. So I don't
> know what insecurity you are possibly talking about, and seem unwilling to
> elaborate.

Sybil attacks leading to front-running.

You may not be aware of this, but not being able to get the best price
due to a sybil attack *is* considered to be a security issue by the
users of these systems.

> I have read your posting and engaged with you in that very thread, where I
> point out that global ordering of bids & asks is a superfluous requirement.

It's superfluous until you have real businesses actually using these
systems.

> As to front-running, there is a distinct difference between centralized
> systems where front-running is essentially theft, and a distributed block
> chain system with actual costs paid by fees captured from the spread.

Among other things, ever noticed how this incentivises people to sybil
attack the entire system? Not good.

-- 
'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
000000000000000012f5511833a1304a72a754df8afef26f5712438bcc40826b
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 650 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20141221/5accbf50/attachment.sig>


More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list