justusranvier
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1006



View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
October 03, 2014, 02:24:30 PM

"...that it may become impossible to seize coins from websites in the future. Such a feature could certainly prevent economic catastrophes like Mt. Gox. It also means the current US Marshals bitcoin auction may be the last one of its kind in history...."

https://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/checklocktimeverify-means-bitcoin-escrow-refunds-fork/
I understand how timelocked refunds can make privacy-destroying tracking wallets like GreenAddress unable to steal deposits, to better convince users to voluntarily submit to the Panopticon.

I don't see any way at all they can be useful for an exchange, nor have I ever heard a satisfactory explanation.

Example:

1. Alices wires $1000 to Mt Gox, and receives credit for this deposit in her account.
2. Bob deposits 1 BTC to a 2-of-2 multisig address negotiated with Mt Gox with a time-locked refund and receives credit for the deposit in his account.
3. Alice places a limit buy order for 1 BTC @ $1000
4. Bob places a market sell order for 1 BTC.
5. Bob's BTC balances is now 0 and his USD balance is $1000
6. Alice's BTC balance is now 1 and her USD balance is $0

What's the state of the time-locked refund transaction?

If it changed at some point in this procedure, where and how did it change?

Did any step 3-6 need to be delayed in order to wait for blockchain confirmations of a new transaction?

Do Alice and Bob have equal protection against BTC loss throughout the entire procedure?