[bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security

bfd at cock.lu bfd at cock.lu
Fri Jan 6 02:04:22 UTC 2017

You might as well replace Bitcoin with a system where these parties
sign transactions and skip mining altogether, it would have the same
properties and be significantly more effient.

On 2017-01-04 23:06, Chris Priest wrote:
> On 1/3/17, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>> There are plenty, more sane options. If you can't run your own 
>> full-node
>> as a merchant (trivial), maybe co-use a wallet-service with 
>> centralized
>> verification (maybe use two of them), I guess Copay would be one of
>> those wallets (as an example). Use them in watch-only mode.
> The best way is to connect to the mempool of each miner and check to
> see if they have your txid in their mempool.
> https://www.antpool.com/api/is_in_mempool?txid=334847bb...
> https://www.f2pool.com/api/is_in_mempool?txid=334847bb...
> https://bw.com/api/is_in_mempool?txid=334847bb...
> https://bitfury.com/api/is_in_mempool?txid=334847bb...
> https://btcc.com/api/is_in_mempool?txid=334847bb...
> If each of these services return "True", and you know those services
> so not engage in RBF, then you can assume with great confidence that
> your transaction will be in the next block, or in a block very soon.
> If any one of those services return "False", then you must assume that
> it is possible that there is a double spend floating around, and that
> you should wait to see if that tx gets confirmed. The problem is that
> not every pool runs such a service to check the contents of their
> mempool...
> This is an example of mining centralization increasing the security of
> zero confirm. If more people mined, this method will not work as well
> because it would require you to call the API of hundreds of different
> potential block creators.

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list