Lightning network mempool fud or fact?

Is this recent development regarding a critical flaw in the LN true, does it hold any validity? Because I think it's just FUD from some phony “developer”

Have you heard of this. What do you think?

9 thoughts on “Lightning network mempool fud or fact?”

  1. Not a phony developer. Worst case scenario is Lightning becomes more hub and spoke. Which is fine with me, to this day nobody has adequately (with an scenario of a real world person it would dramatically effect) explained to me why it matters if routing is somewhat centralized on Lightning as long as the base layer is decentralized.

  2. Shinobi tweeted

    “Lightning is not dead, and this is getting silly as shit at this point. The solution to this issue is as simple as extending timelocks and rebroadcasting transactions regularly with a slight fee bump, or just handling pre-signed TXes in a different way.

    The sky isn’t falling.”

  3. I have always considered lightning to be the “spend” layer and the base layer is the “savings” layer.

    So I don’t mind if lightning is considered like a hot wallet and is not as decentralized.

  4. I think r/TheLightningNetwork is fine. Yes, there’s an issue and it’ll get fixed like every other software out there. We call these fixes an update. Your phone does them all the time. So does Bitcoin.

    Calling in u/eyeoft

  5. I cant find anything about CVE-2023-40234 anywhere besides that website, nothing in NVD, nothing in exploitdb, nothing in github

  6. At worst, Lightning was never proclaimed as the final answer to instant and cheap transactions. There are and will be more L2’s. People that aren’t devs or coders should be fighting The US Treasury.

  8. The LN serves no purpose; no one is going to trust it with large amounts of coins and centralized services are perfectly fine for holding and spending sats.

Comments are closed.