user60742: When we plot the attacker's computational power against the probability of double spending with a number of blocks equal to zero, we always get a chance of 100%.
This plot is based on the original white paper that models the probability of success as a Poisson distribution.
Is this correct?
Shouldn't the probability of success then be related to the computational power the attacker possesses?

user575: It is implicitly assumed that the attacker performs a Finney attack, and hence gets a block for free. If the merchant accepts a 0-conf tx, the attacker will proceed immediately to release a double-spending block he has already computed, and thus succeed.
In any case, Satoshi's analysis is approximate, see https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf for a more accurate one (which makes a similar assumption).

60742: <p>When we plot the attacker's computational power against the probability of double spending with a number of blocks equal to zero, we always get a chance of 100%.</p>

<p>This plot is based on the original white paper that models the probability of success as a Poisson distribution.</p>

<p>Is this correct?</p>

<p>Shouldn't the probability of success then be related to the computational power the attacker possesses?</p>
 575: <p>It is implicitly assumed that the attacker performs a Finney attack, and hence gets a block for free. If the merchant accepts a 0-conf tx, the attacker will proceed immediately to release a double-spending block he has already computed, and thus succeed.</p>

<p>In any case, Satoshi's analysis is approximate, see <a href="https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://bitcoil.co.il/Doublespend.pdf</a> for a more accurate one (which makes a similar assumption).</p>
