<p>Is it possible to hard code a block and its block hash into the client so that the block chain will never diverge from the main chain past that block?</p>

<p>My thought is that this will improve confidence for long term investors that their transactions are "safe" and can't be rolled back without consensus of the network (a.k.a 51% of the clients have that block as hard coded and can't be rolled back)</p>

<ul>
<li><p>Is this a reasonable idea?</p></li>
<li><p>Has it been discussed before?</p></li>
<li><p>Is it already implemented in some form?</p></li>
</ul>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-13T17:16:18.737Z
Hmm, it appears this feature is implemented as "checkpoints" http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/3115/1878
makerofthings7
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-13T17:56:34.317Z
Yeah, post this comment as an answer and accept it in 2 days.
ripper234
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-13T18:02:58.930Z
@ripper234 I voted to close. FYI I didn't delete the question because I want it to act as a signpost to that earlier Q
makerofthings7
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-13T18:46:11.340Z
Good call, you have my vote. I don't believe in deleting questions.
ripper234
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-13T18:55:20.843Z
@ripper234 Yea, me too. I dislike that aspect of stackoverflow.com's culture.  They are heavy handed on the deletes.
makerofthings7
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-14T01:29:14.770Z
Close != Delete.
Stephen Gornick
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-03-14T04:08:14.810Z
@StephenGornick - I agree.. though many highly upvoted questions have been deleted after a close.  See SO's meta.  I think some people are farming for rep or a badge or something.
makerofthings7
<blockchain><security><blockchain-fork>
Can the Bitcoin protocol be configured to *never* rollback after a certain block?
makerofthings7
# Can the Bitcoin protocol be configured to *never* rollback after a certain block?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-03-13)

Is it possible to hard code a block and its block hash into the client so that the block chain will never diverge from the main chain past that block?

My thought is that this will improve confidence for long term investors that their transactions are "safe" and can't be rolled back without consensus of the network (a.k.a 51% of the clients have that block as hard coded and can't be rolled back)

* Is this a reasonable idea?
* Has it been discussed before?
* Is it already implemented in some form?

**Tags:** blockchain, security, blockchain-fork

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: Hmm, it appears this feature is implemented as "checkpoints" http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/a/3115/1878  
> **username_1**: Yeah, post this comment as an answer and accept it in 2 days.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 I voted to close. FYI I didn't delete the question because I want it to act as a signpost to that earlier Q  
> **username_1**: Good call, you have my vote. I don't believe in deleting questions.  
> **username_0**: @username_1 Yea, me too. I dislike that aspect of stackoverflow.com's culture.  They are heavy handed on the deletes.  
> **username_2**: Close != Delete.  
> **username_0**: @StephenGornick - I agree.. though many highly upvoted questions have been deleted after a close.  See SO's meta.  I think some people are farming for rep or a badge or something.  

---

## 0 answers

