Author: Antoine Riard 2022-10-21 01:04:24
Published on: 2022-10-21T01:04:24+00:00
The email conversation between Antoine Riard and Sergej Kotliar revolves around the risks associated with implementing RBF (Replace-by-Fee) as the default policy for Bitcoin transactions. While there are measures that can be taken to reduce the risk of attacks, there is concern that automatic fee-bumping logic based on historical mempool data may lead to abuse of the system.One of the risks discussed is the American call option, which could endanger the BIP21 "Scan this QR code" model of Bitcoin payments. This risk involves users making low-fee transactions and then waiting for a change in BTCUSD rate before cancelling the transaction and making a cheaper one. The zeroconf risk, which refers to the risk of double-spending in unconfirmed transactions, is easily managed, but the FX (Foreign Exchange) risk poses a bigger threat to merchants who must commit to a certain BTCUSD rate ahead of time.Bitrefill, a company that processes 1500-2000 onchain payments every day, may turn off the BIP21 model for onchain payments if Bitcoin becomes de facto RBF by default. However, this option is not available for other payment providers such as BTCPayServer and Bitpay. Lightning currently accounts for 15% of Bitrefill's total bitcoin payments, but it may not be a feasible solution for all bitcoin users who do not have access to Lightning.Sergej Kotliar also expresses concern about a proposed policy that would require Lightning Network (LN) channels to be closed before an on-chain transaction can be made from the same wallet. He believes that such a policy would limit user experience and could result in many users shifting to alternative cryptocurrencies.Kotliar discusses the challenges of introducing new features to wallets and the need to balance security risks with user experience. He shares his perspective on the efficacy of Replace-by-Fee (RBF) and Child Pays for Parent (CPFP) methods for "unstucking" transactions, noting that they are not widely understood by non-power-users and may cause confusion if rolled out to the broad market. Ultimately, Kotliar suggests a risk-based approach to decide which payments should be non-trivial to reverse. The discussion highlights the need for weighing the risks and costs associated with 0confs applications and contracting protocols in light of full-rbf.
Updated on: 2023-06-16T00:57:08.086270+00:00