How Does RBF Influence the Security of Zero-Confirmation Transactions? ⎊ Path

How Does RBF Influence the Security of Zero-Confirmation Transactions?

RBF significantly reduces the security of zero-confirmation (0-conf) transactions, which are transactions not yet included in a block. With RBF, a sender can easily double-spend by broadcasting the original 0-conf transaction and then immediately replacing it with a conflicting transaction that pays the funds back to the sender, with a higher fee.

Merchants accepting 0-conf payments are therefore at a higher risk of fraud if the transaction was flagged as RBF-enabled.

How Do Zero-Confirmation Transactions Increase the Vulnerability to a Double-Spend?

What Is the Practical Difference between “Opt-in RBF” and “Full RBF”?

What Is the Risk of a “Double-Spend” Related to the Mempool and Unconfirmed Transactions?

What Are the Risks of Using RBF for a Sender or Receiver?

How Does a ‘Replace-by-Fee’ (RBF) Transaction Work?

What Is “Replace-by-Fee” (RBF) and How Does It Affect Miners?

What Is the Common Economic Incentive That Prevents a 51% Attack on a Cryptocurrency Network?

Why Is Full RBF Controversial among Some Cryptocurrency Users and Merchants?