Replying to Avatar Guy Swann

Ok, let me ask about more specific scenarios then and we can see which pieces of this I’m missing:

Let’s start with a really simple one to make sure we are on the same page:

Let’s assume a mining pool with 70% of the hashrate, but no mining users in the pool with the DC full node, the pool OP writes a transaction that includes a bunch of honest transactions, but one malicious one that pays out of the DC like 10k BTC to themselves. Then they put it in the mining pool’s blocks and everyone starts blindly ACKing it without realizing.

What is it about the transaction/nodes/etc that prevent this transaction from either being written, or prevents it from being confirmed?

(I realize this is unlikely and I don’t want the normal “it won’t happens because” arguments, I want this played out so I can understand how it works)

Avatar
Guy Swann 2y ago

I realize I didn’t stipulate that the transaction here is one that pays out of the DC hash rate escrow, if that wasn’t obvious.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Avatar
Cyber Seagull 2y ago

Nothing is payed out of the DC hashrate escrow, besides regular main chain fees for a regular utxo. Fees payed to miners in Bip 301 (the other DC bip, NOT hash escrow) are different. I will not describe them here as this clarification reply from you question is not related.

Thread collapsed