New answers tagged

1

When a channel is closed unilaterally, it requires two transactions by the closing party to move funds from a channel back into unilateral control. The closing party publishes their version of the commitment transaction to the network. The commitment transaction has a special condition for the closer's output. After the commitment transaction is included in ...


0

This is a special case of 51% attack. The lock of the funds in a force-close is at a minimum 144 blocks for the person who submit the old state, but the other party can claim their share at once. They can also submit a penalty transaction at once, and have all the funds in a channel to spend from. So 144 is how many blocks that had to be mined in secret to ...


-1

You can't as described here: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2018-March/001080.html Tl,dr: if one controlls more than 50% of hashrate and secretly mines the longest chain with old state one can steal the entire capacity of all channels one is connected to. Reward is much higher than regular Bitcoin double spent through reorg but ...


1

It's named "penalty transaction" by the specs :). Regarding your core question, you are right but this also requires this miner to be able to heal this block chain without a censored (the penalty) transaction. It therefore assumes that a single miner has more hashpower than the rest of the network combined. Thus it can be stated as such: The ...


Top 50 recent answers are included