Author: Peter Todd 2022-11-02 14:04:03
Published on: 2022-11-02T14:04:03+00:00
On the Bitcoin-dev mailing list, Antoine Riard suggested an alternative solution to solve multi-party funding pinning instead of wide deployment of full-RBF. However, Peter Todd strongly disagreed and said that incurring engineering costs and harming privacy for the sake of a very marginal use case like zeroconf is ridiculous. He added that if anything, they should be moving to full-RBF so that the privacy cost of opt-in-RBF can be undone. He also mentioned that mempool consistency will even further diminish making zeroconf even harder to achieve in the near future. The only services that have spoken up in support of zeroconf are Bitrefill and Muun, and the latter is working to get rid of their vulnerability to it. People attempting to make it secure have repeatedly done sybil attacks against the network in attempts to measure transaction propagation.
Updated on: 2023-06-16T02:43:20.100475+00:00