* This adds two sections to dip 0008. The first section considers the security of Chain Locks and provides the calculations needed to evaluate the security. The second added sections provides mitigations of situtaions when
attackers do not own the collatoral of the masternodes.
* Update dip-0008.md
* Fix hyperlinks
* Update dip-0008.md
* Update dip-0008.md
correction of word.
Co-Authored-By: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008.md
Need to make sure it's always big choose small.
Co-Authored-By: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* Fixes inconsistantcy in gifs
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
fix tpyo
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008.md
Changing titles, todo change table.
Co-Authored-By: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* Clarify table
This handles the edge case of witholding a ChainLock correctly, it takes 161 nodes to withold a ChainLock.
Also makes table clearer to read.
* Clarify malicious chainlock
Based on suggestions from AndyFreer a second paragraph is added to explain what can go wrong.
* Update dip-0008.md
Add line break.
Co-Authored-By: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
* Apply suggestions of thephez
The calculations were updated to refelct the fact that 161 masternodes are needed to withhold a chainlock
in a previous commit. This commit updates the text and displayed formulas to reflect this fact.
We also alert the reader that we assume that all uncompromised nodes are behaiving as expected. We include the effect of relaxing this
assumption, however the calculations are left to the reader. The python function provided makes it easy.
* Fix two typos
* Update dip-0008.md
one missed 160->161
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008.md
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Correct C size in sumation formula
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
correct spelling
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
correct spelling
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
correct spelling
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
correct spelling
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
correct spelling
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update dip-0008/quorum_attack.py
Co-Authored-By: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: UdjinM6 <UdjinM6@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: thephez <thephez@users.noreply.github.com>
* Update DIP8 to use "blockHeight" instead of prevBlockHash in request ids
This prevents conflicting CLSIGs on temporary chain splits. The code was
already using the block height, but the DIP was never updated.
* Add "Used LLMQ type" section to DIP8
* Describe safe transactions in DIP8
* Update dip-0008.md
* Review suggestions from thephez
