Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: New transaction malleability attack wave? Another stresstest?
by
gmaxwell
on 05/10/2015, 23:28:14 UTC
Yes, and that sounds like a good solution. Miners could mutate all transactions into their 'canonical' state before mining them. That way well behaved wallets aren't affected, and wallets creating weird transactions still have their transactions mined, but with a different txid.
This is a fine thing to do (though it requires first getting the amount of non-canonical producers down to a negligible amount, something I've been trying to accomplish for two years!); but it does not achieve the goals of BIP62,  which is to make transactions involving refunds safe... doing that requires that the solution not depend on miner honesty. Smiley Thus BIP62... that it fixes third party txid aggravation for a subset of transactions is a helpful side effect (though first/second party txid changes and malleability will _always_ remain in general, because it's a feature.. not a bug. And wallets do need to handle it sanely).

But it seems people are much more interested in whining here than working even the basic detective work to cut out the last of the non-canonical users on the network (which I've asked people to do _twice_ in this thread, and not a single message has made progress towards that).   Come on people,  don't prove Amaclin right about the Tragedy_of_the_commons comment. Smiley