|
Title: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: Alikhaki123 on August 18, 2021, 10:57:05 PM As you know, each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. During this time, interaction is permitted and may also be reversible. Deceptive users try to cheat. If you can't wait for approval, request a small transaction fee or use the Unsafe Interactions Detection System, which can enhance security. For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially.
Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: ranochigo on August 19, 2021, 01:47:39 AM Fees only serves to help with the speed at which you're going to get a confirmation, ie. the number of blocks before you get a confirmation. It doesn't help with the security, in any way if you include a large fee but you accept it before it gets a confirmation. If the transaction is small enough, includes sufficient fees and has no opt-in RBF, then you could possibly accept it without any confirmations.
Anything above a single confirmation should be sufficient, unless you're talking about a million dollars. It is extremely unlikely for anyone to execute a 51% attack against a $1000 transaction. There is no reason to extend the wait and would just cause unnecessary hassle. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: Poker Player on August 19, 2021, 05:10:25 AM I think the OP is speaking more from hearsay than from his own experiences doing Bitcoin transactions:
As you know, each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. If you pay the highest fee, it might start 10 minutes on average but it is not strange to have to wait for more than an hour for the next block confirmation. To talk about instant transactions, however much they are immediately transmitted to the blockchain, I would say is inaccurate. If we were talking about LN, like Jack Maller's Strike, as you can see in the following 1-minute video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt2C3CsLi7k), I think we could talk about instant transactions, but not about normal transactions on the blockchain, even if you pay a high fee to make them go fast. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: franky1 on August 19, 2021, 05:21:19 AM a 51% attack is about undoing a block(and transaction within) after its confirmed
and this costs $250k per block. and depending on that hashpower it could cost many blocks(time=$) to go back and then redo the block and then try to catch up with the network so a pool trying to do this must want to undo a transaction of that value+ for him to even bother trying. meaning why waste $250k trying to under a transaction worth only $10k so most are safe with value upto $250k with 1 confirm as for zero confirm scenarios. well they can be ignored and never get put into a block if the sender then passes a different preferred spend destination of his same funds with a higher fee. the approach is to a. not allow instant release of service or goods without confirm or b. if goods or services provide good margin/profit(little cost) where the genuine customers outweigh the 1% theft concern. meaning on balance you still make a profit even with acceptable loss.. then take the risk of instant payment back in the good old days of cheques. this is what they did. they knew/assumed 1% of customers will write a duff cheque. and so they weight the risk vs cost.. and the convenience vs inconvenience Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: pooya87 on August 19, 2021, 05:25:51 AM There is no such thing as "instant transactions" in bitcoin. You are talking about "unconfirmed transactions".
In bitcoin when you send a transaction, almost always it propagates to all nodes within seconds. These transactions reside in nodes memory pool (assuming they remain valid). During this time they are called "unconfirmed" and they can be double spent which is why it has never been safe to accept an unconfirmed transaction. When the next new block is mined (which could take from a second to a couple of hours) it could contain that unconfirmed transaction if it was paying a high enough fee compared to others or if the mempool didn't contain enough higher paying transactions to fill the block. This is referred to as being "confirmed" and as you said it becomes increasingly harder to reverse these transactions. For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially. There are a couple of things that are usually ignored by people when talking about number of confirmations.1. The network state. Under normal circumstances (eg. right now) there is nothing going on so the chances of a chain split and a reorg is minimal but during a fork or a network disruption like 2017 or anything that could increase this risk the number of confirmation one demands has to increase. In some cases you may even wait for more than 200. 2. The client type. A full node will be aware of any chain split or generally speaking any form of disruption in the network. An SPV client on the other hand may not even figure it out for a long time and remain on the wrong chain. There is also more "centralized" non-custodial wallets where they only rely on a single server (most of phone wallets) that have a much higher risk. In cases like this the number of confirmation required for security is much higher. 3. The amount and the payer. Finally the only factor people are aware of. For higher amounts you want more confirmation and vice versa. Also if you know who is paying you (eg. a friend sending you money he owed) you may require a different number of confirmation. For example a food truck doesn't care about confirmation because the risk of someone double spending a bitcoin payment for a hotdog is the same as the risk of someone giving them fake cash bills, it's the acceptable risk of running a business. Speaking of amount, it is not arbitrary. It also relates to the cost of the attack as @ranochigo pointed out. Since in order to reverse a confirmed transaction you'll have to perform a 51% attack and the cost of that is extremely high, $1000 can not be considered a high amount. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: tranthidung on August 19, 2021, 05:31:14 AM each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. Bitcoin transactions are not instant. Sometimes, you feel that your transactions are instantly confirmed but it does not mean Bitcoin transactions are instant.Block time on average is 10 minutes, per protocol. Depend on the interaction between network hashpower and difficulty, blocks can be solved slower or faster than the average rate of 10 minutes, for each 14 days. 14 days are for 2016 blocks, that is a period between two difficulty retargets (adjustments). Some times, in a same 14D period, two blocks can be found within seconds or a few minutes shorter than 10 mins. However, it does not happen too often. Quote For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially. Usually, exchanges credit your deposit to your balance after 2 confirmations.For your personal deal, 3 to 6 confirmations are the best for your safety. Bitcoin transactions are far secured than altcoin transactions. That's my point though - you don't need 51% of the hashrate to still have a chance to reverse a transaction. If you have 51% of the hashrate, and can sustain that indefinitely, then theoretically with enough time you have a 100% chance to reverse any transaction since the last hardcoded block. But even with a much smaller fraction of the hashrate there is still a chance you can reverse a transaction. For 3 confirmations, the numbers look like this:
If I'm selling something like a house or a car for several tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars worth, then even a 1% chance of reversal is too high for me. For the sake of an additional 30 minutes, I'm waiting for some more confirmations. If I'm selling some second hand books or something for a few bucks, then 3 confirmations is more than enough. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: slaman29 on August 19, 2021, 07:49:54 AM As you know, each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. During this time, interaction is permitted and may also be reversible. Deceptive users try to cheat. If you can't wait for approval, request a small transaction fee or use the Unsafe Interactions Detection System, which can enhance security. For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially. Double spend attacks are no longer easy to carry out, and most sites already can detect the moment the spender tries to doublespend the coins. Even with RBF flagged sites will invalidate the original transactin. I think these days even 1 confirmation is enough but most sites require just 3, I haven't seen 6 confirmations in a very long time now:) Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: o_e_l_e_o on August 19, 2021, 01:24:08 PM Some times, in a same 14D period, two blocks can be found within seconds or a few minutes shorter than 10 mins. However, it does not happen too often. Actually, more often than you might think. Mining blocks is a Poisson process, and so the probability of finding a block within the next x seconds can be given by the equation:1-e(-x/600) I you set x to be 2 minutes (120 seconds), then you'll find that 18.1% of blocks, almost one fifth, are found within 2 minutes of the last block. To drop below the "1% of blocks" range, you have to lower your time limit to only 6 seconds. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: franky1 on August 21, 2021, 10:03:16 PM Some times, in a same 14D period, two blocks can be found within seconds or a few minutes shorter than 10 mins. However, it does not happen too often. Actually, more often than you might think. Mining blocks is a Poisson process, and so the probability of finding a block within the next x seconds can be given by the equation:1-e(-x/600) I you set x to be 2 minutes (120 seconds), then you'll find that 18.1% of blocks, almost one fifth, are found within 2 minutes of the last block. To drop below the "1% of blocks" range, you have to lower your time limit to only 6 seconds. um no.. you really are going wrong alot this month what it is, is this imagine there are 20 pools one with 15exa nine with 5exa each ten with 3 exa each totalling 90exa the big pool(15exa) can go through the entire nonce sequence in 50 minutes the nine pools(5exa) each go through the nonce range in 150minutes each the ten pools(3exa) each go through the nonce range in 500minutes each the odds of big pool getting a block in 10 minutes is ~20% the odds of one of the nine (5xa) is ~6.6% the odds of one of the ten(3exa) is 4% and it plays out like this (using excel and rand function) block 1 pool 15exa 37 (rand*50) pool 5exa 147 (rand*150) pool 5exa 84 (rand*150) pool 5exa 127 (rand*150) pool 5exa 13 (rand*150) pool 5exa 49 (rand*150) pool 5exa 31 (rand*150) pool 5exa 113 (rand*150) pool 5exa 61 (rand*150) pool 5exa 93 (rand*150) pool 3exa 95 (rand*250) pool 3exa 28 (rand*250) pool 3exa 123 (rand*250) pool 3exa 21 (rand*250) pool 3exa 164 (rand*250) pool 3exa 224 (rand*250) pool 3exa 51 (rand*250) pool 3exa 82 (rand*250) pool 3exa 63 (rand*250) pool 3exa 211 (rand*250) block 2 pool 15exa 6 pool 5exa 52 pool 5exa 111 pool 5exa 109 pool 5exa 74 pool 5exa 59 pool 5exa 38 pool 5exa 22 pool 5exa 54 pool 5exa 128 pool 3exa 130 pool 3exa 172 pool 3exa 11 pool 3exa 64 pool 3exa 36 pool 3exa 140 pool 3exa 152 pool 3exa 225 pool 3exa 156 pool 3exa 50 and if you run it enough times you see that its no where even close to 18% of pools getting a block nearly at the same time. what you do work out is the 'fastest first' of each block if you add it all up and average it over 2016 times is that the average works out as a block ~ every 10 minutes. where by the big pool(15exa) gets more blocks on average than the other pools Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: Trojane on August 21, 2021, 10:24:26 PM Programmers and excutives of this currency haven't made stricter securities as a matter of fact . you could only safely purchase these coins but that doesn't guarantee them being 100% secured for now
Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: o_e_l_e_o on August 22, 2021, 09:22:26 AM -snip- Your numbers are wrong and also irrelevant.It doesn't matter who controls what hash power, as long as the total hash power is roughly the same as it was at the last difficulty retarget and so the average block time is still close to 600 seconds. If this is not the case, then you can adjust the numbers in the equation I gave above. We are considering the entire network here, not individual miners. As I stated above, bitcoin mining is a Poisson process. You can read about this here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poisson_point_process You can model the distribution using the equation (as given on the linked page above): P{N = n} = Λn * e-Λ / n! If you take n to equal 0 (i.e. you won't find a block), and take lambda (Λ) to equal the number of blocks you would expect to find in a given time frame, then you can simplify that equation to P = Λ0 * e-Λ / 0! P = 1 * e-Λ / 1 P = e-Λ Therefore, the probability of not finding a block when you would expect to find Λ blocks is equal to e-Λ. For example, the probability of not finding a block in 10 minutes, when you would ordinarily expect to find 1 block in 10 minutes, is e-1 = 36.8% Given the equation P = e-Λ, then we can take the inverse to find the probability of finding a block: 1-P = 1-e-Λ. So the probability of finding a block in 10 minutes is 1-e-1 = 63.2%. So, as I said above, the probability of finding a block in 2 minutes is therefore 1-e-0.2 = 18.1%. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: kryptqnick on August 22, 2021, 09:32:02 AM As you know, each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. During this time, interaction is permitted and may also be reversible. Deceptive users try to cheat. If you can't wait for approval, request a small transaction fee or use the Unsafe Interactions Detection System, which can enhance security. For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially. Do you mean zero-confirmation transactions when you say 'instant' transactions? They are indeed unsafe and can be manipulated, but I think they're also the future of true global adoption (we just need to set a reasonable max limit for a transaction like this, and prosecute the cheaters when possible). That's because you don't need to wait, and you don't have to pay crazy fees, and these two are essential if we're dreaming of a future where you can pay with BTC at a supermarket. That being said, I've never seen anyone accept such transactions so far (at least one confirmation is a requirement for local exchanges I use, for instance).Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: Keremgor on August 22, 2021, 10:27:10 AM Best secure tx method with full wallet control is Grin s tx style ,even prevents rookie users to send wrong adress. https://medium.com/@brandonarvanaghi/grin-transactions-explained-step-by-step-fdceb905a853 Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: tranthidung on August 22, 2021, 03:02:12 PM Actually, more often than you might think. Mining blocks is a Poisson process, and so the probability of finding a block within the next x seconds can be given by the equation: From real data, it's what I get.1-e(-x/600) I you set x to be 2 minutes (120 seconds), then you'll find that 18.1% of blocks, almost one fifth, are found within 2 minutes of the last block. To drop below the "1% of blocks" range, you have to lower your time limit to only 6 seconds.
Details All time Code: Summary for variables: blocktime_diff 2020 Code: Summary for variables: blocktime_diff 2021 Code: blocktime_cat | N mean sd p50 p25 p75 min max Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: o_e_l_e_o on August 22, 2021, 03:23:46 PM From real data, it's what I get. Perfect. Thanks for the verification.We can use the formula I gave above to calculate the probability with a specific time frame as you have. So, for example, if we are interested in the 11 - 20s bracket, we would calculate the probability of finding a block within 20 seconds, the probability of finding a block within 10 seconds, and then subtract the two. Given this, then for the brackets you have used then numbers look like this:
There is a slight skew away from "greater than 10 minutes" towards blocks being a bit faster than 10 minutes. This is due to the fact that the average block time is almost always under 10 minutes due to the constantly increasing hash rate. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: tranthidung on August 22, 2021, 03:33:41 PM There is a slight skew away from "greater than 10 minutes" towards blocks being a bit faster than 10 minutes. This is due to the fact that the average block time is almost always under 10 minutes due to the constantly increasing hash rate. It is due to the fact that the Bitcoin difficulty retarget (or adjustment) is set for each 2016 block (~ 14 days). Most of retargets in history are positive that is what you implied. Hashrate increases first, blocks within 14 days will be found faster than before, and it's certainly that more blocks will be found shorter than 10 minutes or at least shorter than average time before most of difficulty retargets.
Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: ranochigo on August 23, 2021, 01:24:20 PM If you're talking about 0-conf transaction, you should choose how much risk you're willing to accept. DannyHamilton posted brief idea about it. I used to think heuristics are sufficient to prevent fraud but that isn't really that applicable as time goes by. If every transaction has an opt-in RBF, then chances are, there would be an inherent degree of risk to every of your transactions and it isn't sufficient cushioning for most merchants. Bitpay used to have a pretty neat zero-conf for loads of TXes but I haven't had it in the recent years. The network has become more volatile and unpredictable so losses from these zero-conf TXes are potentially going to occupy a larger percentage.The risk is of course, relative and that the measures taken are all valid. However, given that we've gotten so many off-chain solutions, I don't really think it is necessary for merchants to still be undertaking these risks with their transactions. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: o_e_l_e_o on August 23, 2021, 07:15:53 PM and it's certainly that more blocks will be found shorter than 10 minutes or at least shorter than average time before most of difficulty retargets. The average block time over the entirety of bitcoin's existence is actually 9 minutes 32 seconds. If you replace 600 with 572 in my equations above, they come very close to the observed rates.If every transaction has an opt-in RBF, then chances are, there would be an inherent degree of risk to every of your transactions and it isn't sufficient cushioning for most merchants. If every transaction was opted-in to RBF, then the only situation in which it would reasonable to accept zero confirmation transactions in my opinion would be situations where you trust the other party to make good on a promise. If you wouldn't accept an "IOU" or someone verbally telling you that they'll pay you at a later date, then you shouldn't accept a zero confirmation transaction from that person.However, given that we've gotten so many off-chain solutions, I don't really think it is necessary for merchants to still be undertaking these risks with their transactions. Completely agree. If you want to accept payments instantly or make payments instantly, then just open a Lightning channel. There are plenty of wallets out there now which will do all the heavy lifting so to speak for you if you really can't be bothered to open a channel yourself.and was easily broken into by hackers Bitcoin has never been "broken into by hackers".Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: DannyHamilton on August 23, 2021, 10:09:38 PM So, as I said above, the probability of finding a block in 2 minutes is therefore 1-e-0.2 = 18.1%. An interesting effect of the maths involved that MANY people get wrong is: No matter how long you've been waiting for a block, if a block isn't found yet, you will always have an average of 10 more minutes to wait. If a block has just been found, then the average wait until the next block will be 10 minutes. If you've been waiting 5 minutes since the last block was found, then the average wait until the next block is found will be 10 minutes. If you've been waiting 20 minutes since the last block was found, then the average wait until the next block is found will be 10 minutes. If you've been waiting an hour since the last block was found, then the average wait until the next block is found will be 10 minutes. Furthermore (if I remember my maths correctly, but correct me if I'm wrong on this one) your calculation isn't ONLY for the probability of finding a block within 2 minutes of the previous block. It's also the probability that a block will be found in the NEXT 2 MINUTES, no matter how long you've already been waiting. So, after 10 minutes of waiting since the most recently found block, there's still an 18.1% probability that the next block will show up in the NEXT 2 MINUTES. After an hour of waiting since the most recently found block, there's still an 18.1% probability that the next block will show up in the NEXT 2 MINUTES. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: ranochigo on August 24, 2021, 08:27:31 AM While i agree that the network is more volatile (mainly due to popularity of opt-in RBF), there are still few ways to accept 0-conf transaction. For example, Actually, I remember I used to hear that certain gambling sites were implementing this before but eventually stopped doing this. An attack vector for this would be to deposit funds > If loss = Double spend, else confirm. The tactic was exploited through GHash.io previously, but I recall there were more instances of this happening and eventually it was stopped altogether or at least available only for non-optinRBF Txes. 1. On casino, you can't withdraw your coin before all deposit have at least 1 confirmation. 0-conf TXes at low amounts would still be feasible in the case that the attacker exposes their identity in the first place and makes it easy to persecute if needed. Else, then it really doesn't make sense and even with $3 TXes, I never had the chance to get instant TXes anymore. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: o_e_l_e_o on August 24, 2021, 08:45:06 AM Furthermore (if I remember my maths correctly, but correct me if I'm wrong on this one) your calculation isn't ONLY for the probability of finding a block within 2 minutes of the previous block. It's also the probability that a block will be found in the NEXT 2 MINUTES, no matter how long you've already been waiting. So, after 10 minutes of waiting since the most recently found block, there's still an 18.1% probability that the next block will show up in the NEXT 2 MINUTES. After an hour of waiting since the most recently found block, there's still an 18.1% probability that the next block will show up in the NEXT 2 MINUTES. Everything you have written is correct, but I wanted to expand on this last point. The probability of the next 2 minutes is always the same, but the probability of a specific 2 minutes changes.For example. Let's say I am interested in a block being mined between minutes 10 and 12. I calculate the probability of mining a block in the next 12 minutes, and I calculate the probability of mining a block in the next 10 minutes, and I subtract the two. The probability, then, of finding a block between minutes 10 and 12 works out to 6.7%. However, by the time we get to the 10 minute mark, that probability is now 18.1%. Obviously this makes sense when you think about it, as every 2 minute bracket can't have a probability of 18.1%, or else we would rapidly end up with >100% chance. Bitcoin mining is a memoryless process. It doesn't matter what came before - it is always 10 minutes on average until the next block. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: lixer on August 25, 2021, 06:30:34 PM As you know, each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. During this time, interaction is permitted and may also be reversible. Deceptive users try to cheat. If you can't wait for approval, request a small transaction fee or use the Unsafe Interactions Detection System, which can enhance security. For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially. The confirmations are very important for a reason, but I have never seen a bitcoin transaction reversed before. Maybe there are big companies, that runs wallet and owns a mining farm that may be able to do that, but I have not seen or heard that it was reversed before. That aside, the transaction fees that you’re paying for the transactions you’re making with bitcoin are what determines how fast your transaction is going to be. When you’re doing this transaction you have three options and the highest option there which is priority tries to make sure that your transaction is in the next block and gets confirmed immediately.Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: RapTarX on August 25, 2021, 06:40:02 PM The confirmations are very important for a reason, but I have never seen a bitcoin transaction reversed before. Maybe there are big companies, that runs wallet and owns a mining farm that may be able to do that, but I have not seen or heard that it was reversed before. That aside, the transaction fees that you’re paying for the transactions you’re making with bitcoin are what determines how fast your transaction is going to be. When you’re doing this transaction you have three options and the highest option there which is priority tries to make sure that your transaction is in the next block and gets confirmed immediately. There's no reverse actually but there's double spend in which you can use the same input for creating two transactions where the later one (likely) will be confirmed as you are going to pay a higher fee for that transaction. Thus, the prior one is invalid and you can successfully have spent the same input twice. Well, 1 confirmation is more than enough for even $100k now I guess as the network is quite more mature now.Which fee options are you talking about? I guess you are talking about blockchain wallet which is quite misleading in terms of the actual fee model. You generally pay fee per byte. Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: Shenzou on August 25, 2021, 07:24:31 PM As you know, each Bitcoin transaction usually takes a few seconds, and confirmation of the same transaction starts ten minutes after that. During this time, interaction is permitted and may also be reversible. Deceptive users try to cheat. If you can't wait for approval, request a small transaction fee or use the Unsafe Interactions Detection System, which can enhance security. For higher amounts, e.g. US$1,000, it makes sense to wait for 6 confirmations or more. Any confirmation can reduce the risk of reverse transactions exponentially. I think that is one of the biggest problems that we re are facing with bitcoin, lets say you are a shop owner who is trying to make bitcoin a payment system, how do you go about accepting transactions, for goods do you wait for confirmations before giving the goods, do you demand you customers to pay higher transaction fees in order to speed up the transaction, or do you personally cover it, i feel like there is more work need to make paying for day to day things more efficient.Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: o_e_l_e_o on August 25, 2021, 07:39:55 PM Well, 1 confirmation is more than enough for even $100k now I guess as the network is quite more mature now. The maturity of the network is irrelevant. There still exists a possibility of an attacker being able to reverse a 1 block deficit, even without 51% of the hashrate. Even an attacker with only 10% of the hash rate has a 20% chance of reversing a single confirmation. We still get stale blocks even without any active attacks on the network (although these rarely result in successful double spends, the possibility still exists). If $100k is small change to you, then sure, accept 1 confirmation. But if $100k is a significant amount of money to you, I'd be waiting for 3-6 confirmations.I think that is one of the biggest problems that we re are facing with bitcoin, lets say you are a shop owner who is trying to make bitcoin a payment system, how do you go about accepting transactions, for goods do you wait for confirmations before giving the goods, do you demand you customers to pay higher transaction fees in order to speed up the transaction, or do you personally cover it Credit card transactions do not result in money reaching the merchant for 3-5 working days, and can be reversed for 90-180 days after the transaction, and yet almost everywhere accepts credit card transactions because the majority of people are honest and will not try to scam. It is entirely reasonable for merchants to accept zero confirmations for transactions which are not that valuable, pay a reasonable fee, and are not opted in to RBF. If they are uncomfortable doing that, then they can open a Lightning channel.Title: Re: Bitcoin instant transactions are less secure Post by: EvieLannister on August 26, 2021, 09:07:14 AM Instant transaction means that both parties will trust each other.
Without a third-party guarantee, if it is cheated, the chance of getting it back is not very high. All transactions need to be careful. |
