What Is the Risk of a "Double-Spend" Related to the Mempool and Unconfirmed Transactions? ⎊ Path

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

The risk of a double-spend is highest when a transaction is in the mempool but not yet confirmed in a block. A double-spend occurs when a user successfully creates two conflicting transactions using the same funds.

If a recipient accepts payment based on an unconfirmed transaction, the sender could broadcast a second, conflicting transaction with a higher fee. A miner might then include the second transaction, invalidating the first and defrauding the recipient.

How Does the Mempool Relate to a Double-Spend Attempt?

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

What Is the Primary Incentive for a Miner to Include a Transaction in a Block?

How Does a Transaction Get Broadcast to the Mempools of Different Nodes?

How Is a Second-Preimage Attack Different from a First-Preimage Attack?

What Is the Difference between a Node’s Mempool and the Global Set of Unconfirmed Transactions?

What Is a ‘Replace-by-Fee’ (RBF) Transaction?

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