Author: Chris Priest 2015-11-06 23:41:36
Published on: 2015-11-06T23:41:36+00:00
The security of the blockchain system is independent of the ratio between full nodes and lightweight nodes, as stated by a user in a Bitcoin-dev forum discussion. The ideal ratio of full nodes to client-only nodes that the network must maintain does not exist. The security of the system is independent of this ratio. Furthermore, the link between full node ratio and network security is not clear to the user. Small block people need to provide a better case about how the full node ratio relates to network security (especially the 'for everyone' part), because the argument is not self-evident. In contrast, Adam Back suggests that power users and businesses using APIs instead of running a full-node, or instead of doing SPV checks, should be clear about the API and what security they are delegating to a third party. They should also ensure they have reason to trust the governance and security competence of the third party. Adam Back also points out that widespread use of APIs as a sole means of interfacing with the blockchain erodes the consensus rule validation security, which affects the entire network. This is because economically dependent full nodes are an important part of Bitcoin's security model as they assure Bitcoin security by enforcing consensus rules. Weakening occurs not only due to non-validating wallet software and centralized (web) wallets but also centralized Bitcoin APIs. Developers tend to settle on a few API providers for a given problem. All applications and users of them, depending on an API service, reduce to a single validator. Imagine most Bitcoin applications built on the equivalent of Bing and Google. Chris Priest argues that blockchain APIs are a good thing for decentralization. There are dozens of blockexplorer APIs out there, and each API returns essentially the same data making them interchangeable.
Updated on: 2023-06-11T00:53:13.628297+00:00