The detection seems to be done after the address is linked, that's whay I raised this concern:
Isn't there a risk that someone links an exchange address on December 24 23:59:59 UTC and gets included in the snapshot? Meaning would it be costly to try and detect exchange addresses before adding them?
Or am I missing something and there's no concern to have in this regard? i.e. you/the bot will be able to detect such an address and remove it before the snapshot.
If you link the same Bitcoin address to another Byteball address, the old link is currently removed. We could blacklist such Bitcoin addresses altogether (i.e. if different Byteball addresses try to link to them) but this might negatively affect blockchain.info users who have constant address by default as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong).
Okay, given the fact that the old link is removed (fast enough), my question is no longer relevant. It is just that I saw one address linked to two bytaball addresses, so I don't know how fast the bot detects that and removes the link. I assume the bot will be able to remove redundant links done on December 24 at 23:59:59 UTC before the snapshot(?).
Thx.
Edit: Once again:
Edit2: The second transaction
https://btc.blockr.io/tx/info/c546e318eaea173787e55db286c49e90241934fc844dfc77d7ab9231b1e8755a has been done at 20:30 UTC, it has been almost 40 minutes and it is still in the list, this coupled with the fact the the bot doesn't reply on the chat interface means that the bot is again dead ...
There are two different things:
Detection: works immediately and rejects the microtransaction if it has more than 2 outputs.
Deduplication: removing of conflicting links happens after both transactions attain more than 10 confirmations. It will work even after the snapshot and can remove conflicting links created in the last minutes of Dec 24.
Further lowering of micropayment amount is risky because it opens an attack vector: an attacker might see your microtransaction on the blockchain and repeat it exactly from his address (i.e. send the same amount to the same our address) trying to link his address and trick you to send all your bitcoins to his address. Most users will notice, and the attacker just loses his bitcoins, but if the amounts are too small, the attack might pay off.
Why would lowering the micropayment be riskier than with the current micropayments? (because they would be easily spotted?)
Because the attack would become cheaper, hence worthwhile.
Yes, signed message cannot be abused easily.
Yes in most standard cases it can't, but exchanges can sign a message with an address holding funds which are not really theirs, can't they?
I contacted most exchanges, and those who replied said they won't. I have their word on that.
this coupled with the fact the the bot doesn't reply on the chat interface means that the bot is again dead ...
It was offline for an hour. It tends to die every other time I step away from the computer that you might think I am the bot
I'll try to double the memory on the machine, hope it helps.
