Unpopular Opinion: Bitcoin Does NOT Eliminate Double Spending … Necessarily

: on 26 August 2020

In my last entry, I discussed the Web-based discussion resource known as Reddit. I relatively recently added Reddit to my list of places I regularly go to track discussions on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency, as well as a number of other topics of personal interest. (Because of the many topics of personal interest, and my laziness, I do not have a separate business and personal identity, and attempt to stay as anonymous as possible. Those who know me would easily piece together my identity.)

Reddit is not a good place for XBRL discussion at the present time; there’s just no active community. But I have learned or been reminded of many things about Bitcoin from tracking the discussions there. You may recall I wrote an article for ThinkTWENTY20 some issues back, debunking some fallacies about Bitcoin. So, it is interesting to see many of those play out in the discussions.

Let’s begin with a very important lesson that I’m not sure even most avid Bitcoiners are very aware of – it IS possible to “double-spend” Bitcoin. That was what Bitcoin was supposed to be all about – “prevent[ing] double-spending” with “a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network.” It is about removing the “possibility of reversal,” so that recipients no longer need to “be wary of their customers.”

With paper money, I cannot give the same physical money to two different people (although I can promise it to two different people). With electronic solutions, however, you – as the person I promised money to – can receive copies of electronic files or I can cut the cord or I can dispute the transfer.

So, with Bitcoin, you can watch a transfer go into a queue, and be finalized onto the Bitcoin blockchain as blocks are added every 10 minutes. If you are in a hurry, you may have assumed that the transaction in the queue was no longer under the influence of the sender, even if it had not yet been added to the blockchain; you may therefore have gone ahead with your part of the deal while waiting for the system to catch up.” The whole “peer-to-peer network” thing was supposed to take this out of the sender’s hands.

And then you learn about RBF. RBF in this case stands for “replace by fee.” RBF is not discussed in the Satoshi Nakamoto white paper. And yet RBF permits double spending … if you “enable” RBF on your wallet as a sender for that transaction.

RBF was developed because Bitcoin is not like a credit card. With a credit card, the merchant pays fees. With Bitcoin, the sender pays fees, and the amount is chosen by the user. Pay too little, and the miners who grab transactions and add them to blocks to add to the blockchain may ignore your transaction in favor of other transactions offering higher fees. So if the transaction is sitting around too long, RBF lets you come up with a higher fee to encourage a miner to act more quickly; if they do so, the prior transaction becomes null and void. If I send you Bitcoin, if I act fast enough, I can override the original transaction and send the Bitcoin back to myself instead – potentially destroying trust in unconfirmed transactions.

The anecdote that first made me aware of RBF was that of a technical person (“OP”) who out-scammed a scammer. The scammer wanted the OP to send him Bitcoin. The OP pretended he was a novice, and asked if they could do a smaller sample run. The OP sent $1,000 in Bitcoin, and the scammer sent the $1,000 back. What the scammer didn’t know is that the OP had enabled this “RBF”, and was able to reroute the $1,000 back to himself; as the scammer wasn’t aware of this trick, he was now out $1,000. The scammer could not pull back his own money, and the 10 minute wait made the ruse simple.

So, the scammer was in a hurry, and assumed that the transaction in the queue was no longer under the control of the OP, and therefore sent the Bitcoin back before the original transaction was confirmed on the blockchain. Had he waited the 10+ minutes – or noticed that the RBF was enabled – he would not have acted immediately and would have let the system catch up.

Therefore, if you are receiving Bitcoin and someone seems to be anxious to complete a transaction before the process of sending the Bitcoin is confirmed, you need to know to look for the signs of whether RBF is enabled; this is sometimes indicated by a “Replaceable” or “RBF enabled” flag on the unconfirmed transaction.

Other lessons to come.

Comments

No comments found

Forum Recent Posts

Data Driven Sustainability Decisions

Tuesday, 03 May 2022

Gerald Trites, FCA, CISA

While companies have traditionally viewed sustainability decisions as separate from monetary decisions, this is changing. It’s partly because of generational changes, with millennials now being the largest component of the workplace and partly considerations driven by customer demand, investor demand regulatory requirement and common-sense observation of the destruction caused by climate change. Compelling reasons.

Companies have been moving more clearly to data driven decision making for several years. So it makes sense they would turn to data to drive their decisions in the sustainability area.

To accomplish this, they need to first define their sustainability goals. This usually begins with industry trends and information from stakeholders about their sustainability concerns and the development of a sustainability strategic plan. Second, begins the process of data modelling and analysis drawn from internal and external sources. Many organizations have well defined data gathering processes already in place, but these need to be modified to take into account sustainability goals. Finally, the adoption of data driven sustainability decision making requires the adoption of AI techniques to automate data gathering, modelling and reporting functions.

Established enterprise systems are moving in this direction, the availability of which, as well as their compatibility with existing systems, is an important consideration.

Overall, a creative combination of data management, analytics, AI and integration of sustainability processes with established corporate processes are crucial to a successful outcome – the creation of a truly sustainable enterprise.

How All Accounting Reports Will be Digitized

Thursday, 31 March 2022

Gerald Trites, FCA

The SEC was the major regulatory body that got the ball rolling in 2009, when it mandated rules for the use of the interactive data format (XBRL) for public company financial statements. Then several other countries and organizations got on the band wagon. There was a relatively quiet period for a few years, when the new electronic form of reporting seemed stalled. But then the EU stepped in and began requiring their ESEF filings in 2021. That meant most of the major companies in the world were using digitized reporting.

For regulators and governments, digital filing of reports has been an opportunity to streamline the processing and analysis of the reports. Users such as investors, on the other hand, have often been unsure about what to do with these reports.

The fact is, much attention has been given in recent years to the production of digital reports, but very little given to their consumption. True, there are utilities that can be purchased to enable people to read reports in digitized form, the SEC provides such a one, and the recent moves to inline XBRL mean the reports can be read in the conventional way, (ESEF is a variation on inline XBRL). But most of these attempts to render digital reports readable cater to the idea of sequential reading in the conventional sense. Most people do not read this way, unless perhaps they are reading a novel. When they want information, they tend to go to that information as fast as they can. This is the standard approach most people follow in using the internet. People don’t read the internet. Nor generally do they read a corporate website from beginning to end. That would be bizarre!

But yet, we provide annual reports in paper or PDF form, which extend to around 150 pages and often more, of difficult, often technical, material and expect people to read them. It doesn’t happen. Professional analysts might, but they are more likely to employ analytical tools to get the information they need.

There is an excellent article on the website of the International Federation of Accountants (IFAC) by Amir Ghandar, titled “The Accounting Revolution Will Be Digitized”.^[1] In that article, Mr Ghandar points out that “A 2D, static annual report format in paper or pdf is not that different to the papyrus on which Egyptian scribes reported on the royal inventories more than 7,000 years ago.”

Much more than this is needed in the modern world. Technology and complexity have advanced tremendously and the style of reporting needs to keep pace.

Two areas need further work. One involves the steps necessary to encourage legislators and regulators in countries to adopt digital reporting. While a majority of countries have adopted it, there is still a number who haven’t. Then there is the need to take the steps to change digital reporting to make it more understandable and usable to the users. This means providing the resources for them to actually draw out the data they want. These resources need to be made available along with the reports themselves. Some companies in their websites have started doing this, through the provision of data banks and some analytical tools, however it needs to become commonplace and much more powerful and sweeping.

Developing this approach to corporate reporting requires interaction and discussion between corporate reporters and users, regulators and standards-setters to address the issues.

Those issues involve more than figuring out how to present digital information and how to use it. It involves determining what information to present, how to present it and when. It involves looking back at the basic tenets that have ruled accounting since its beginnings. The need for annual and other periodic reports. Can they be continuous? Can we eliminate the need for those pesky annual accounting judgements that cause so much trouble? Can we include the tools for analysis within the disclosures rather than relying on the software industry to deliver them? This cannot be accomplished within paper or pdf reports, but rather on the corporate websites. Most companies have moved their reporting to their websites. But they generally have ported over the old paper paradigm, rather than seriously adopting new and innovative ways to report in the information age. It’s well past time we did that.

https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/contributing-global-economy/discussion/accounting-revolution-will-be-digitized

^[1] https://www.ifac.org/knowledge-gateway/contributing-global-economy/discussion/accounting-revolution-will-be-digitized

ThinkTWENTY20

Leave a comment

Comments

Login