Author: Jorge Timón 2015-08-05 19:29:41
Published on: 2015-08-05T19:29:41+00:00
A discussion on the security of bip102 has prompted a reminder to keep defects specific to each proposal in their own threads. Regarding uncontroversial hardforks, Jorge Timón suggests that miners' upgrade confirmation is necessary for such proposals, but there seems to be disagreement on this point. Peter Todd clarifies that a strong supermajority of miner support is required to prevent attack, and therefore 95% approval is the minimum safety requirement. However, Hearn's proposal of using centralized checkpoints to override PoW consensus raises serious questions, including legal issues. Todd notes that miners have several options to defeat forks without their approval, such as making their own fork with a new consensus algorithm or attacking the unwanted chain.
Updated on: 2023-06-10T04:21:04.282420+00:00