Author: Eric Lombrozo 2015-02-22 11:41:26
Published on: 2015-02-22T11:41:26+00:00
The discussion revolves around two motivations for double-spending: the ability to replace a fee and the ability to replace outputs. If the double-spend only adds or removes inputs, but keeps at least one input in common, it is considered a genuine fee replacement. However, if at least one input is kept, but none of the outputs are, it can be assumed that it's the latter. A wallet can be built that always does the former when doing fee replacement by using another transaction to create an output with exactly the additional desired fee. If these two cases can be distinguished, the fee replacement case can be handled by relaying both and letting miners pick one or the other while the output replacement case could be handled by rewarding everything to a miner. The discussion also touches on the negative impact of ceasing the "maintaining [of] first seen policies," which would have a wide, negative impact on present-day bitcoin payments. Instant payments need a security upgrade.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T16:51:42.432772+00:00