Author: Danny Thorpe 2015-05-26 18:22:00
Published on: 2015-05-26T18:22:00+00:00
The email thread discusses the effectiveness of Replace-By-Fee (RBF) and Child-Pays-For-Parent (CPFP) in preventing fraudulent payment reversals. The scenario presented involves paying for hard goods with 1BTC, receiving the goods, and then broadcasting a double spend of the transaction to pay nothing. RBF is proposed as a solution, as it allows for the rebroadcasting of the original transaction with a higher fee to ensure priority confirmation, rather than creating a new transaction with a higher fee. This results in cost savings ranging from 30% to 90%, depending on the situation. CPFP is deemed more expensive than RBF, particularly for defragmenting outputs. Four cases are presented to demonstrate the cost savings of using RBF over CPFP. In Case 1, RBF results in cost savings of 48% compared to CPFP when increasing the fee on a single transaction. In Case 2, RBF results in cost savings of 84% when paying multiple recipients in succession. In Case 3, RBF results in cost savings of 90% when paying multiple recipients from a 2-of-3 multisig wallet. In Case 4, RBF results in cost savings ranging from 32% to 59%, or even infinite if defragmentation without RBF costs more in additional fees than it saves. Overall, RBF is deemed more effective and cost-efficient than CPFP for preventing fraudulent payment reversals.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T21:19:06.397004+00:00