From a164dec42734dfb144219547a509e26951cbec68 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Oscar Guindzberg Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2018 12:50:25 -0300 Subject: [PATCH] BisqRiskAnalysis: update comment --- core/src/main/java/bisq/core/btc/wallet/BisqRiskAnalysis.java | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/core/src/main/java/bisq/core/btc/wallet/BisqRiskAnalysis.java b/core/src/main/java/bisq/core/btc/wallet/BisqRiskAnalysis.java index e4ba55f8d9..d148202165 100644 --- a/core/src/main/java/bisq/core/btc/wallet/BisqRiskAnalysis.java +++ b/core/src/main/java/bisq/core/btc/wallet/BisqRiskAnalysis.java @@ -58,7 +58,8 @@ import static com.google.common.base.Preconditions.checkState; // Copied from DefaultRiskAnalysis as DefaultRiskAnalysis has mostly private methods and constructor so we cannot // override it. -// Only change to DefaultRiskAnalysis is removal of the RBF check. +// The changes to DefaultRiskAnalysis are: removal of the RBF check and accept as standard an OP_RETURN outputs +// with 0 value. // For Bisq's use cases RBF is not considered risky. Requiring a confirmation for RBF payments from a users // external wallet to Bisq would hurt usability. The trade transaction requires anyway a confirmation and we don't see // a use case where a Bisq user accepts unconfirmed payment from untrusted peers and would not wait anyway for at least