These are chat archives for grin_community/dev
Grin development , for general questions use the #support channel- https://github.com/mimblewimble/grin
I agree it would be the ideal scenario, but that's not reality
Why is it unrealistic?
but is this provable in some way?
I think it works something like this: I’m a buyer, interacting with a vendor to buy a book. We complete a transaction, and I post it on the blockchain. Now let’s say vendor comes back and says “I never received the money, you never sent me any grins.” Because the protocol is interactive, and I as a buyer would have needed vendor to sign with their private key as part of step 2 before passing the slate back to me to finalize in step 3 before broadcasting, the vendor cannot deny that they did not sign it. If I can prove there is a transaction on the blockchain that corresponds to the vendor’s step 2 slate, only the person in control of the step 2 private key could have control of those funds now.
Following up on yesterday’s discussion on disaster scenarios please review this:
Not sure these are the right risk scenarios, I just tried to put down as many I could think of. I think there may be room to reduce/simplify. Feel free to jump in! It’s a wiki after all.
@jaspervdm this is what happens everytime my remote node receive the transaction
Aug 08 15:10:06.019 INFO Client X.X.X.X:23414 corrupted, ban (CorruptedData).
Original first 32 bytes:
Sent first 32 bytes:
Received first 32 bytes: