Luke Dashjr on nostr

Open in Damus

@Luke Dashjr 1701824927

PSA: “Inscriptions” are exploiting a vulnerability in #Bitcoin Core to spam the blockchain. Bitcoin Core has, since 2013, allowed users to set a limit on the size of extra data in transactions they relay or mine (`-datacarriersize`). By obfuscating their data as program code, Inscriptions bypass this limit.

This bug was recently fixed in Bitcoin Knots v25.1. It took longer than usual due to my workflow being severely disrupted at the end of last year (v24 was skipped entirely).

Bitcoin Core is still vulnerable in the upcoming v26 release. I can only hope it will finally get fixed before v27 next year.

6129❤️57🤙61❤️4🔥3🚀3⚡2

pleb_world · 128w

Gildong.Hong · 128w

Are OP Codes Other than OP_RETURN affected by '-datacarriersize'?

Thank you your Great work 🫂

Piriya ⚡🟧 · 128w

Ok, let me try to understand this. So Bitcoin core has an option to set a data limit for extra data in each transaction but since inscription obfuscate 'extra data' as program code, ie, putting data elsewhere, like in the signature, for example, they were able to bypass this limit. So this 'fix' ...

Do inscriptions take up more blockspace for the same price as a normal transaction?

waxwing · 128w

Program code is data. You cannot control how people interpret it. Isn't the fundamental issue here, the witness discount? Apart from that i can't see anything else worthy of discussion. If people are prepared to pay for data encoded in txs, they will always be able to - even in the most disruptive ...

I prefer to let the fee market price those nitwits out, but I'm glad you did this with Knots so we can see the difference in performance between clients.

snowflake · 128w

Does it mean that blockchain size of my node will grow at an slower rate with this flag set?

Mabardino 🍀 · 128w

if they're paying the fees then they're valid transactions my friend, stop censoring bitcoin users for your own ideologies

rieger_san · 128w

It’s not a bug, it’s a feature!

You a threat to bitcoin.. who made you the leader.. agian you and jack are the feds

Meridian · 128w

Decentralisation in Bitcoin's codebase comes from the ability of anyone to release their own reference client, that enforces the consensus rules, as they see fit. Users are divided, at this time, over the legitimacy of 'inscription' transactions. All Bitcoin Knots is doing, is giving users a sim...

₿harat · 128w

Good to understand that this is a bug.

⚡₿it₿y₿it⚡ · 128w

Ordinals respectors can go fork themselves

nostrich · 128w

What's the best way some one with software experience xan help you move the forward? Bitcoin Core Pr reviews and testing?

Knot gonna make it

Protect Your Keys · 128w

Ocean's use of Knots will exclude all Samourai Whirlpool Tx0's (in their current form) due to the OP_RETURN restrictions. Tx0 OP_RETURN = 46 bytes Knots OP_RETURN relay max = 42 bytes Gtfo

Anonostr · 128w

If this is widely adopted and they encode their data inside dust transaction addresses it will take more space and be unprunable. High fees are enough disincentive

⚡₿it₿y₿it⚡ · 128w

nostr:nevent1qqsfcrfn7qcckejr4up7q6fqqumjv3zj82y6xvsyvq74f8d6eepugmcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujumt0wd68ytnsw43qyg8l9eqjxx0sz7yxs7nrmcey3shfltpl9tg4u0tzrc45yf6u4ju7e5psgqqqqqqslslvgz

SmokingEarl · 128w

this is great work

and it's not one of the notable changes? https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/blob/master/doc/release-notes/release-notes-25.1.md

𝕾𝖊𝖗 𝕾𝖑𝖊𝖊𝖕𝖞 · 128w

Hey Luke! Sent you an invite to the 24hr frog talk!! Check DMs 🐸

Hi, Luke. Do I understand the issue correctly that unreachable script code is being filled with the inscriptions? If so, could the transactions be included with the unreachable code optimized out, like what compilers do when producing a binary?

Gravital organics enthusiast · 128w

If organics are going to start telling machines what they can or can't do just to conserve resources, maybe the machines will start telling organics what they can or can't do.