Warn user when transactions are tagged for RBF

[xbtdev]

Now that Opt-In RBF has been merged into Bitcoin Core, I would suggest an option in wallet settings "Require confirmation before displaying RBF transactions". I would suggest that this option be enabled by default, and users be warned when they try to disable it.

The user still needs to be alerted that an incoming transaction is being received, but it needs to be clearly distinguished from normal transactions. I would suggest the wallet home screen have a notification "Waiting for confirmation for reversible incoming transaction. Not safe until confirmed."

[luke-jr]

Transactions are never safe until confirmed. RBF (even unconditional instead of opt-in) doesn't change that.

[dabura667]

To say that the probability of having an incoming transaction replaced by a double spend attempt is exactly equal in both non-RBF and RBF scenarios is disinegnuous.

If you consider any non-100%-safe thing as "unsafe", Then you must consider 1 confirmation as equally unsafe as unconfirmed... And 2 confirms... And 3 confirms... And so on and so on.

Security based on lowering probability of attack success to miniscule amounts is what POW and Bitcoin is based on, turn around and saying "any non-100% safe feature should be broken purposefully to prevent people from relying on it" would lead to the logical conclusion of "ok, break 1 confirm, now break 2 confirms... etc"

[isocolsky]

For the time being, I think the best thing we can do is ignore RBF transactions until they get 1 confirmation (at which point the user will get notified of the incoming tx). Adding extra messages and warnings to the UI will only increase complexity for non-expert users.
If RBF transactions become the norm, we can review this policy.

[xbtdev]

For the time being, I think the best thing we can do is ignore RBF transactions until they get 1 confirmation (at which point the user will get notified of the incoming tx). Adding extra messages and warnings to the UI will only increase complexity for non-expert users.
If RBF transactions become the norm, we can review this policy.

That sounds reasonable.

[franamati]

Knowing that a transaction is in mempool is useful, even with RBF. Maybe an advance option to show them with a special UX flag (exclamation mark or something) would be nice.

[dabura667]

+1 on ignoring RBF until 1st confirm.

[matiu]

JFYI, this is been worked out in Insight (first) then BWS and then Copay.
It is not simple as it sounds since a non-RBF TX could depend (use
unconfirmed inputs) from RBF TXs.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:33 PM, Dabura667 [email protected]
wrote:

+1 on ignoring RBF until 1st confirm.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
https://github.com/bitpay/copay/issues/3546#issuecomment-172889695.

BitPay.com

[matiu]

depends on bitpay/bitcore-wallet-service#430