<p>You need to provide fees on bitcoin transactions, in which case, you are producing economically valid transactions and will run out of money eventually.</p>

<p>Currently the min fee is 0.0001 (BTC).</p>

<p>Listed here - <a href="https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees" rel="nofollow">https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees</a></p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-09T00:43:39.967Z
I can not see where it is written that fee is compulsory.
Salvador Dali
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-08T04:02:51.187Z
2013-12-08T04:02:51.187Z
エェリ
<p>You can to a certain degree abuse the fact that very large amounts of Bitcoin will be free to make a transaction with. There's at least one address which has been sending the same coins to itself many hundreds of times and abusing this. In most cases this is prevented by the transaction fee, which is one of it's primary purposes. </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-08T04:15:16.863Z
2013-12-08T04:15:16.863Z
Anonymous
<p>Would it be possible to hamper the network's efforts in validating blocks by creating millions and millions of bogus transactions- simply sending back and forth say 0.1 BTC from address A --> B --> C --> A and so on endlessly? Obviously this would hard to do by hand but if there were an automated script it could be done theoretically quite easily..</p>

<p>Or would this strategy have absolutely no effect?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-09T00:41:21.143Z
The OP does not speak about dust (small transactions and 0.1 BTC seems big enough). He speaks about cyclic transactions.
Salvador Dali
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-12-09T03:29:18.127Z
well, basically that person would be paying a shitload of transaction fees or would cause transactions without fees to be delayed. Big whoop?
Murch
<hash><hacking>
Could there be an exploit by creating millions of meaningless transactions?
user10405
# Could there be an exploit by creating millions of meaningless transactions?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2013-12-08)

Would it be possible to hamper the network's efforts in validating blocks by creating millions and millions of bogus transactions- simply sending back and forth say 0.1 BTC from address A --> B --> C --> A and so on endlessly? Obviously this would hard to do by hand but if there were an automated script it could be done theoretically quite easily..

Or would this strategy have absolutely no effect?

**Tags:** hash, hacking

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: The OP does not speak about dust (small transactions and 0.1 BTC seems big enough). He speaks about cyclic transactions.  
> **username_2**: well, basically that person would be paying a shitload of transaction fees or would cause transactions without fees to be delayed. Big whoop?  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2013-12-08. Score: 1

You need to provide fees on bitcoin transactions, in which case, you are producing economically valid transactions and will run out of money eventually.

Currently the min fee is 0.0001 (BTC).

Listed here - <https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Transaction_fees>

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: I can not see where it is written that fee is compulsory.  

---

### Answer by username_4 on 2013-12-08. Score: 0

You can to a certain degree abuse the fact that very large amounts of Bitcoin will be free to make a transaction with. There's at least one address which has been sending the same coins to itself many hundreds of times and abusing this. In most cases this is prevented by the transaction fee, which is one of it's primary purposes.


---

