Topic: Full RBF - page 2. (Read 3043 times)

Somehow this probability is always larger than I'd expect intuitively. Your answer seems to be correct:


Being the first to solve the puzzle is meaningless if someone else beats you to getting their transaction confirmed. Someone else could have solved the puzzle between the time you took to create this transaction, and broadcast the real one.

It is possible to publicly announce SHA-256 of the public key, and get it deeply confirmed, and announced everywhere. Then, if any mining pool will try to overwrite a valid block, there will be a strong, publicly-verifiable evidence, that they did it.

Because the solver can announce for example "OP_RIPEMD160 62e907b15cbf27d5425399ebf6f0fb50ebb88f18 OP_EQUALVERIFY OP_CHECKSIG", and get it deeply confirmed, without trusting anyone, and without touching the puzzle. And then, everyone can see, if the reward from the puzzle was first moved into "solverPubKey" or not.

Foundry USA currently has access to approximately 28% of the hashrate. This means that it has 39% probability to successfully rewrite the entire previous block and mine another one on a row. Therefore, they have two choices.

• Either continue honestly, with 28% chance of mining the next block and earning 3.125 BTC, or
• Gamble the hashpower of 2 blocks, with 39% chance of success, earning about 10 BTC.

Theoretically, it's worth the gamble, even though I haven't worked on the exact math behind it. However, in practice, destroying reputation like that is a suicide.

The blockchain is publicly available, so if ever, that mining pool is risking their reputation for a couple more bitcoins.
vjudeu's reply to the linked topic in my previous post has a nice take on that matter: /index.php?topic=5492493.msg63955089#msg63955089

If that's a big mining pool that has a slight chance to do that, the odds that they'll do that is still low.
If a small solo miner who got no reputation to lose, they will need a tremendous luck to pull that off.

The smallest puzzle on address 13zb1hQbWVsc2S7ZTZnP2G4undNNpdh5so has at the moment of writing 6.60056114 BTC. The basic block reward without fees is now 3.125 BTC. Which means, that if a block has no fees, then the easiest puzzle is worth more than the newly created coins from two blocks.

What would be the odds of a mining pool trying to replace the mined block and take the puzzle money for themselves? Normally, it's not worth the risk. But if the puzzle prize is (much) large compared to the block reward, that balance may change.

Okay, as I thought.

There are actually a few topics here that already addresses that concern and the consensus is:
"it's not currently possible without the help of a trusted cooperating mining pool/solo miner".

Here's to point you to one of the threads: solve key 66 67 Puzzle how to avoid double spends the tx?
AFAIK, there are other discussions that aren't in the first page or posted as a reply to other topics.

its about this topic bitcoin puzzle
i saw people talk about things didn't know or hear about beore
like this double spend and RBF
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1306983.0;topicseen

It's "average" block time and not an absolute value.

That is based from the adjusted "difficulty" from the previous 2016 blocks (about 2 weeks).
The harder the difficulty, the harder it is to produce a hash lower than the "target".
So since mining is basically generation of pseudo-random hash, we will never know if miners get lucky enough to generate a valid hash in the next second or unlucky to generate it after an hour.

Is there any particular reason for this?
Because in normal circumstances, this shouldn't be an issue if you're the sole owner of the private key.
Solved puzzle 66 or something?

its very clear answer i get it

i see https://mempool.space/
next block found in 13min sometimes 19min and some times in 2min the next block mined
 

higher fee +56 sat/vB


sometimes things confused me like in here block time is ~10min right?

As mentioned by BlackHatCoiner above, if the fee you pay for your transaction is high enough, it will be confirmed in the next block and I just want to add that blocks are mined at the rate of 1 per ~ 10 minutes on average.

These are some wallets that support opt-in RBF: Bitcoin open source wallets that support replace-by-fee (RBF)

If you are not a full node runner, I will advice you to use any of the wallets on the above link.

I have used Electrum, Sparrow and Bluewallet. They are reputed and open source.

If you are a full node runner, you can enable full RBF. Although, SPV wallets that look for nodes that support it should be able to double spend unconfirmed transaction with high fee also even if the transaction does not support opt-in RBF.

What BlackHatCoiner meant is that a transaction that is not confirmed can be double spent.

A transaction can be confirmed within some seconds and it may take some minutes. It depends on the time you make the transaction, the fee rate that you used and the time the next block is mined.

The fastest that you can have it confirmed is in the next block, which can happen anytime. From the next second now to even two hours after. You will have to select the highest fee, though, which as we speak is 43 sat/vb (and use RBF in case that's become less than the highest).

Only if it's confirmed. If it's 0-conf, it can be double-spent with another 0-conf.

thank you for answering

is it possible to have a transaction confirmed in few sec
by putting the higher fee on the time

by saying final i meant with no possibility to rteplace it with another one

Unfortunately, that user is no longer with us. You can stick with any reputable wallet nowadays, and it supports double-spending with RBF.

That is not possible, and it never was in the first place. When your transaction has 0 confirmations, it is by the protocol not final. If you're referring to the mempool policy rule before full RBF, then it is neither possible. Almost all nodes will have upgraded to Full RBF by now, and even if full RBF nodes are a tiny minority, it's enough to reach the mempool of the mining pools.

which wallet you recommend that support RBF, i want to send a transaction and make it final with RBF disabled
how to do this?
even if the node is full RBF is this possible

in other word how to make a transaction final without any possibility to double spend it

On an individual level for simple transactions, then no, there is no difference for you between opt in or full RBF.

The main reasons for full RBF are explained in one of the mailing list posts I linked in the OP: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2021-June/019074.html

In short, full RBF eliminates a number of DoS attacks against multi-party transactions such as Lightning channels and coinjoins, therefore allowing further development of these technologies.

If my wallet allows RBF and still it depends on me to use that option, then what's the point of full RBF over opt-in RBF?
Let's imagine we already have full RBF:
I download wallet X, it doesn't support RBF, so despite the fact that my transaction is marked as RBF enabled, I'm unable to use that option because of my bad wallet.
I download electrum, enable RBF and sign a RBF enabled transaction, I could use RBF yesterday and I can use it today, doesn't matter whether it's an opt-in option or not. If I want to use it, I can use it. It can probably benefit people who use Electrum but forgot to enable RBF but how common is that?

The point there is to use a better wallet. Network rules are not bound or limited by third party developers failing to implement basic functions in their software. Being able to replace an unconfirmed transaction is an increasingly basic function of bitcoin. If your wallet does not allow you to do that, then find a better wallet which does.

The only danger is if you accept zero confirmation transactions. However, these have never really been safe to accept in the first place, but some businesses accepted that risk for the convenience they brought. Full RBF makes no difference to confirmed transactions.

If my transaction doesn't signals for RBF but nodes automatically convert it into RBF enabled transaction, how will I be able to use the RBF option? I mean, let's say that my wallet doesn't support RBF but as I understood, nodes mark all of them as RBF enabled. If my wallet doesn't support RBF, there will be no option for me in software to increase the transaction fee. What's the point there? Or did I misunderstood it?

From my personal experience, every service that accepts transactions with 0 confirmation expects from you to pay high fee, enough to get confirmed in few upcoming blocks. If the fee was not enough, I always had to wait at least for one confirmation. Or in case of casinos, I was able to play with deposited amount despite the fact that it had 0 confirmation but I was unable to withdraw them at least till 1, 3 or 6 confirmation.
So, I think that won't be a huge problem if companies aren't able to accept zero confirmation transactions. At least when I have used that option, that was always formal, I don't really know if your experience is different. You have probably used more bitcoin services than me.

That sounds very logical! But kinda confusing for the nodes, wonder if it causes some kind of danger on network, something similar to double-spending.