Author: Bastien TEINTURIER 2023-08-18 07:30:19+00:00
Published on: 2023-08-18T07:30:19+00:00
The email starts with the sender agreeing that in cases where nodes do not care about their reputation, they may have an incentive to cheat. However, even in such cases, it is easy for users to detect cheating because the backup provider does not know when the wallet has lost state. In this situation, users should not ignore the cheating but instead close their channel. This serves as an incentive for nodes to not cheat because while the wallet user loses money in on-chain fees, the backup provider loses potential routing fees and has a very small chance of successfully stealing funds from the user. The sender acknowledges that a more complex protocol, like the one suggested by the recipient and Thomas, could make sense in this scenario. However, the sender expresses wariness about the additional complexity that such a protocol would add compared to the benefits it brings.Overall, the sender highlights the importance of addressing potential cheating scenarios and suggests that users should not ignore cheating situations but rather take action by closing their channel. The sender also acknowledges the possibility of implementing a more complex protocol to prevent cheating but expresses concerns about the added complexity compared to the benefits it would bring.
Updated on: 2023-08-19T01:45:46.993026+00:00