Newsletters: add 224 (2022-11-02) #909
Conversation
harding
commented
Oct 29, 2022
•
harding
commented
- @bitschmidty
- Bitcoin Core 23927 @xekyo
- Bitcoin Core 25957 @glozow
- Other stuff @harding
| - *More permissive policies require widespread acceptance or better peering:* | ||
| A Bitcoin Core node makes eight outbound connections by default, | ||
| so at least 30% of the network needs to support a more | ||
| permissive policy before a node has 95% chance of finding at |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| permissive policy before a node has 95% chance of finding at | |
| permissive policy before a node has a 95% chance of finding at |
| their capabilities using the services field of the P2P `addr`, | ||
| [`addrv2`][topic addr v2], and `version` messages, allowing nodes | ||
| with common interests to find each other and form sub-networks | ||
| (called *preferential peering*). Alternatively full node |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| (called *preferential peering*). Alternatively full node | |
| (called *preferential peering*). Alternatively, full node |
| easier to identify and censor. It also requires miners to be | ||
| join these sub-networks and alternative networks, raising the |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| easier to identify and censor. It also requires miners to be | |
| join these sub-networks and alternative networks, raising the | |
| easier to identify and censor. It also requires miners to | |
| join these sub-networks and alternative networks, raising the |
|
I guess you may wish to cover https://twitter.com/brqgoo/status/1587397646125260802?t=ihdFNLORbmxCa-6NyFUFMQ&s=19 as a crucial and exploited bug in this weeks newsletter? (lnd nodes seem to be affected and their funds may be at risk because they don't sync with the chain anymore) Edit: Edit2: |
| identify which hop the payment failed at by comparing how many | ||
| satoshis it sent to how many satoshis it received back. | ||
|
|
||
| - **Anchor outputs workaround:** Bastian Teinturier [posted][teinturier |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - **Anchor outputs workaround:** Bastian Teinturier [posted][teinturier | |
| - **Anchor outputs workaround:** Bastien Teinturier [posted][teinturier |
| any transactions which [reuse an address][topic output linking]. | ||
|
|
||
| - *More permissive policies require widespread acceptance or better peering:* | ||
| A Bitcoin Core node makes eight outbound connections by default, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is me being annoying and saying "well, ackshually..."
| A Bitcoin Core node makes eight outbound connections by default, | |
| A Bitcoin Core node relays transactions with eight peers via outbound connections by default, |
I imagine this would certainly be covered in next week's newsletter. Not to downplay the importance, but this is happening <24hr before publishing is scheduled and the newsletter usually covers things from the week before. |
|
I know that it was short notice but I decided to drop/suggest it here as I recall @harding once mentionig that for critical security upgrades the newsletter can have last minute hotfixes and updating lnd/btcd seems critical otherwise peers could steel funds. |
|
Ah wasn't aware, ignore me heh |
| ensure a new policy is good for everyone (or as nearly as it can be), | ||
| and then enabled it as soon as it's implemented. Any options that | ||
| have been added have either been to control resource usage in ways | ||
| that don't significantly effect tx propagation, to allow people to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should be "affect", of course, but we can't fix it since it's a direct quotation. Either add a [sic] -- but that looks like you're picking on AJ -- or consider paraphrasing. Helpful discussion here: Quotations That Include Errors.
But, just to be clear, we should not ignore you when you say "ignore me" 😸 |
| [lnd secpol]: https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/security/policy | ||
| [news207 bc22558]: /en/newsletters/2022/07/06/#bitcoin-core-22558 | ||
| [towns consistency]: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-October/021116.html | ||
| [news205 rbf]: /2022/06/22/#full-replace-by-fee |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| [news205 rbf]: /2022/06/22/#full-replace-by-fee | |
| [news205 rbf]: /en/newsletters/2022/06/22/#full-replace-by-fee |
|
|
||
| - **BIP324 message identifiers:** Pieter Wuille [posted][wuille bip324] | ||
| to the Bitcoin-Dev mailing list a response to the update of the | ||
| [BIP324][] draft specification for the [version 2 P2P encrypted |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| satoshis it sent to how many satoshis it received back. | ||
|
|
||
| - **Anchor outputs workaround:** Bastian Teinturier [posted][teinturier | ||
| fees] to the Lightning-Dev a [proposal][bolts #1036] for replacing |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| fees] to the Lightning-Dev a [proposal][bolts #1036] for replacing | |
| fees] to the Lightning-Dev mailing list a [proposal][bolts #1036] for replacing |
| - [Bitcoin Core #23927][] restricts `getblockfrompeer` on pruned nodes | ||
| to heights below the node's current synchronization progress. This | ||
| prevents a footgun arising from retrieving future blocks making the | ||
| node's block-files ineligible for pruning.</br> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if the <br /> (slash after) is intended or if two newlines were intended here.
| pruning, and cause a pruned node to exceed its data allowance. | ||
|
|
||
| - [Bitcoin Core #25957][] improves the performance of rescans for | ||
| descriptor wallets by using the BIP157 block filter index (if enabled) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps
| descriptor wallets by using the BIP157 block filter index (if enabled) | |
| descriptor wallets by using the [BIP157][topic compact block filters] block filter index (if enabled) |
|
FYI, our publication policy is here: https://gist.github.com/harding/0dffdde00761262ca094219c33b8ff22 (yeah, I should probably move that into the repo at some point). We'll add important security announcements at any time, e.g. we added this less than an hour before publication. In cases like the previous LND vulnerability where I also didn't learn about it until the day before publication, we announce the availability of a security critical fix immediately and then go into details in the subsequent week's newsletter. I'm going to do the same for this week. Thanks @renepickhardt for mentioning and everyone else for discussion! |
|
Edits made, thanks everyone! Also added lede, updated releases/RCs with LND info, and added topic links. Cheers! |
|
ACK 8a50ac2 sans a couple topic description fixups |
bitschmidty
force-pushed
the
2022-11-02-newsletter
branch
from
a5ee9f9
to
bb80465
Compare
|
Another great newsletter thanks @harding @glozow @xekyo for authoring and for @adamjonas @LarryRuane @glozow for reviewing! 🚀 |
