Alerts: SPV Mining more details

This commit is contained in:
David A. Harding 2015-07-04 04:45:22 -04:00
parent fa4d5fd34f
commit 818abdb2ee
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4B29C30FF29EC4B7

View file

@ -5,13 +5,13 @@ active: true
banner: "WARNING: many wallets currently vulnerable to double-spending of confirmed transactions (click here to read)" banner: "WARNING: many wallets currently vulnerable to double-spending of confirmed transactions (click here to read)"
--- ---
<p><em>This document is being updated as new information arrives. Last <p><em>This document is being updated as new information arrives. Last
update: 2015-07-04 08:15 UTC</em></p> update: 2015-07-04 09:00 UTC</em></p>
{% assign confs="30" %} {% assign confs="15" %}
<h2 id="summary">Summary</h2> <h2 id="summary">Summary</h2>
<p>Your bitcoins are safe if you received them in transactions confirmed before 2015-07-04 07:00 UTC.</p> <p>Your bitcoins are safe if you received them in transactions confirmed before 2015-07-04 08:00 UTC.</p>
<p>After that time, confirmation scores are not as reliable as they <p>After that time, confirmation scores are not as reliable as they
usually are for users of certain software:</p> usually are for users of certain software:</p>
@ -54,13 +54,86 @@ systems.</p>
<li><a href="https://www.f2pool.com/">F2Pool</a></li> <li><a href="https://www.f2pool.com/">F2Pool</a></li>
</ul> </ul>
<h2 id="solution">When Will Things Go Back To Normal?</h2>
The problem is miners creating invalid blocks. Some software can detect
that those blocks are invalid and reject them; other software can't
detect that blocks are invalid, so they show confirmations that aren't
real.
<ul>
<li><b>Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 and later</b> never had any problems because
it could detect which blocks were invalid.</li>
<li><b>Bitcoin Core 0.9.4 and earlier</b> will never provide as much
security as later versions of Bitcoin Core because it doesn't know
about the additional <a
href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0066.mediawiki">BIP66</a>
consensus rules. <a href="/en/download">Upgrade</a> is recommended
to return to full node security.</li>
<li><b>Lightweight (SPV) wallets</b> are not safe until all the major
pools switch to full validation. After all the major pools fix
their problems, lightweight wallets will remain vulnerable to one,
two, or rarely three confirmation double spends until near 100% of
total hash rate has upgraded to a BIP66-compliant version of
Bitcoin Core.</li>
<li><b>Web wallets</b> are very diverse in what infrastructure they
run and how they handle double spends, so unless you know for sure
that they use Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 or later for full validation, you
should assume they have the same security as the lightweight
wallets described above.</li>
</ul>
<h2 id="cause">What's Happening</h2> <h2 id="cause">What's Happening</h2>
<p>Some miners are currently generating invalid blocks. Almost all <p>Summary: Some miners are currently generating invalid blocks. Almost
software besides Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 and later will accept these invalid all software (besides Bitcoin Core 0.9.5 and later) will accept these
blocks under certain conditions.</p> invalid blocks under certain conditions. The paragraphs that follow
explain the cause more throughly.</p>
<p><b>More information to follow.</b></p> <p>For several months, an increasing amount of mining hash rate has been
signaling its intent to begin enforcing <a
href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0066.mediawiki">BIP66</a>
strict DER signatures. As part of the BIP66 rules,
once 950 of the last 1,000 blocks were version 3 (v3) blocks, all
upgraded miners would reject version 2 (v2) blocks.</p>
<p>Early morning UTC on 4 July 2015, the 950/1000 (95%) threshold was
reached. Shortly thereafter, a small miner (part of the non-upgraded
5%) mined an invalid block--as was an expected occurrence.
Unfortunately, it turned out that roughly half the network hash rate
was mining without fully validating blocks (called SPV mining), and
built new blocks on top of that invalid block.</p>
<p>Note that the roughly 50% of the network that was SPV mining had
explicitly indicated that they would enforce the BIP66 rules. By not
doing so, several large miners have lost over $50,000 dollars worth
of mining income so far.</p>
<p>All software that assumes blocks are valid (because invalid blocks
cost miners money) is at risk of showing transactions as confirmed
when they really aren't. This particularly affects lightweight (SPV)
wallets and software such as old versions of Bitcoin Core which have
been downgraded to SPV-level security by the new BIP66 consensus
rules.</p>
<p>The immediate fix, which is well underway as of this writing, is to
get all miners off of SPV mining and back to full validation (at
least temporarily). As this progresses, we will reduce our
current recommendation of waiting {{confs}} extra confirmations to a
lower number.</p>
<p>However, the BIP66 soft fork implementation method of waiting for
only 95% of miners to upgrade does leave miner-trusting software such
as lightweight wallets at increased risk of seeing invalid single
confirmations (10% risk), invalid double confirmations (1% risk), and
maybe even invalid triple confirmations (0.1% risk) until more of
the 5% non-upgraded miners do finally upgrade. So for the next
several weeks (maybe months), lightweight wallet users, web wallet
users, and users of old versions of Bitcoin Core should wait an extra
two to three confirmations.</p>
<!-- <!--
<div style="text-align:right"> <div style="text-align:right">