pull down to refresh
32 sats \ 1 reply \ @Wumbo 20 Oct 2023 \ parent \ on: Large lightning vulnerability concern bitcoin
I agree, that is what I understand from the write up (https://github.com/ariard/mempool-research/blob/2023-10-replacement-paper/replacement-cycling.pdf).
An amateur node operator (one who has not already put in place some of the mitigation options) might want to review what channels they currently have open and may not want to accept new channels. Depending on there risk profile.
From the very beginning, I always saw the Lightning layer as a replacement for the bank layer in the fiat system. Banks can and should have selected, trusted relationships with each other. Operating a Lightning node, I have always been frustrated with the assumption that a node operator wants to network willy nilly in a trustless world. I want to choose my channels wisely, not entirely trustlessly, and in my opinion the tooling for that is poor at present, (although admittedly I haven't spent enough time trying all available tools).
Some argue this semi-trust tends toward centralization, but the counterargument is that anyone can start up a Lightning node to fill in the gap anytime one feels like centralization is getting out of control. We still have complete freedom.
reply