Quote from: leea-1334 on November 01, 2017, 10:07:50 AM

Quote from: Searing on November 01, 2017, 09:37:29 AM

What is the need for 'replay protection' if it is gonna use another protocol? I don't get it?

Anyone want to explain what I'm missing?

On a side note: We are gonna see a crap load of forks of BTC imho, why make an ALT from scratch, when you can call it a bitcoin fork for more crypto street cred?

The new way to flood the market with spam/scam/alt coins

Actually, now I am completely lost too. According to their blog, it is still a fork, since they already set a time or block height for forking from BTC blockchain. So now,,, they are implementing a new protocol, on the "old" chain. Then they do not need replay protection? But since they are doing it anyway this clearly means it was a fork.

A fork is just a different version of the protocol. A hard fork is an incompatible version of the protocol. That doesn't mean that replay protection is not necessary. If address/transaction format is identical between the two chains and the UTXO set is copied, transactions can be replayed on the second chain.

That means if you hold BTC and BTG on the same address and you try to send your BTG, your transaction could also be sent on the BTC chain. You could therefore lose BTC. This is the danger of replay attacks, and it's why adding protection against them is important.