Ripple Wallet Transfer

[DollarvsPounds]

What happens if we transfer a certain amount of Ripple to another wallet and credited with more coins to Destination Wallet, or is that impossible to happen? What if that does happen?

 

Appreciate the info about what control does Ripple has in such scenario..

 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Devinadh

[ZX81_1k]

I think you need to reword the question as I don't understand what you're asking. Can you write it again with an example.

[DollarvsPounds]

10 minutes ago, Badger said:

I think you need to reword the question as I don't understand what you're asking. Can you write it again with an example.

Sure Badger. I mean to say if there is any issue with Exchange and during transfer, if more Ripples are credited in destination wallet than the actual amount transfered( keeping the actual reduced amount with out any issue at Source. Means destination wallet received more when compare to actual sent one. 

Lets say we initiated transfer of 200 coins.

Original Source: 200

Original destination : 0

coins at Destination after transfer: 300

coins at Source after transfer : 0

 

Does this really possible in Crypto??...what if this occurance happen and want to know what are the regulations that has to be bounded by Ripple as a company, Exchange and also Receiver.

Edited February 7, 2018 by Devinadh

[ZX81_1k]

I can't imagine a situation where this could possibly occur. If it did then it would undermine the very foundations of all cryptocurrency. 

It could be attempted but the consensus mechanism which validates every single transaction would discard it as an error.

You might want to read up on how crypto transactions are validated and stored to the blockchain for a better understand. I think that'll answer your questions. The principals are the same as bitcoin so take a look at some of the beginner videos on YouTube that explain transactions, distributed ledgers and consensus.

[DollarvsPounds]

15 minutes ago, Badger said:

I can't imagine a situation where this could possibly occur. If it did then it would undermine the very foundations of all cryptocurrency. 

It could be attempted but the consensus mechanism which validates every single transaction would discard it as an error.

You might want to read up on how crypto transactions are validated and stored to the blockchain for a better understand. I think that'll answer your questions. The principals are the same as bitcoin so take a look at some of the beginner videos on YouTube that explain transactions, distributed ledgers and consensus.

 

Thank you for replying Badger. One small doubt which might be somewhat related to above one but i need to re-frame it more clearly. What if the same deposit transaction is repeated over and over and gets deposited multiple times in Receiver Wallet with all new different transaction hash and got validated . Do u think this might occur or still this scenario is no where possible in Crypto(Ripple especially), that actually damages the sole fundamentals of BlockChain..??

lets say Source initiated 200 coins transaction which actually deposited at deposit without any issue. One more deposit of another 200 coins deposited in receiver which is actually not reflected from Source end but final amount is 400 in destination with another transaction ID reflecting that as a receivable from same source. Do u think this ever happen or it's just left out to be an imaginable scenario in Blockchain(Crypto)?

 

Apologise if i ask weird doubt that come in my mind. 

Edited February 7, 2018 by Devinadh

[RiverSong]

The situation you are describing is essentially the "Double-Spending" problem, which is the key issue that any blockchain technology must address before it is viable. Bitcoin and Ether do this through Proof-of-Work, which is what most people call "mining". Ripple solves this through its "Consensus" algorithm. David Schwartz gave an excellent explanation for this process here: 

Don't be scared by the length; the second half is all Q&A.

The issue you raise is important, because any blockchain which allows double-spending to happen will collapse (cough Stellar cough). Fortunately Ripple has thought through that specific problem, and has been running Consensus without issue since 2012.

[DollarvsPounds]

4 hours ago, RiverSong said:

The situation you are describing is essentially the "Double-Spending" problem, which is the key issue that any blockchain technology must address before it is viable. Bitcoin and Ether do this through Proof-of-Work, which is what most people call "mining". Ripple solves this through its "Consensus" algorithm. David Schwartz gave an excellent explanation for this process here: 

Don't be scared by the length; the second half is all Q&A.

The issue you raise is important, because any blockchain which allows double-spending to happen will collapse (cough Stellar cough). Fortunately Ripple has thought through that specific problem, and has been running Consensus without issue since 2012.

So David speaks about Consensus algorithm that says double-spendings are completely stopped at the validator part and no way those kind of transactions proceed further. But what if there is a reason of multi spending where same transaction is repeated more than 2 times which are not reflected in source wallet, but credited multiple transactions of same coin numbers at destination wallet.

lets say :

Coins at source : 200

coins at destination: 0

coins at source after transaction done: 0

coins at destination after transaction done: 200

***coins at destination when multi spending happened and suppose 4 similar credits of 200 each happen from source to destination which made coin number to 800, but still only one spending transaction is showing at Source wallet.

 

Is there any possibility of happening such kind of transactions or is impossible with the Crypto concept where there is no where more than double spending( suppose 4 similar transactions) happens with different transaction number and validated properly. 

[Guest]

18 minutes ago, Devinadh said:

So David speaks about Consensus algorithm that says double-spendings are completely stopped at the validator part and no way those kind of transactions proceed further. But what if there is a reason of multi spending where same transaction is repeated more than 2 times which are not reflected in source wallet, but credited multiple transactions of same coin numbers at destination wallet.

lets say :

Coins at source : 200

coins at destination: 0

coins at source after transaction done: 0

coins at destination after transaction done: 200

***coins at destination when multi spending happened and suppose 4 similar credits of 200 each happen from source to destination which made coin number to 800, but still only one spending transaction is showing at Source wallet.

 

Is there any possibility of happening such kind of transactions or is impossible with the Crypto concept where there is no where more than double spending( suppose 4 similar transactions) happens with different transaction number and validated properly. 

No it can't happen in the XRPL.    Each transaction is validated in the block before it can go in the ledger and each write of a block to the ledger is finished and immutable.   The transactions are atomic and either completely succeed or completely fail.

The certainty and confidence that can be had in a ledger balance is one of the things that makes the XRPL so important and significant.

EDIT:.    I forgot to add that I am not an expert and could be wrong...    but I really really doubt it.

Edited February 8, 2018 by Guest
Disclaimer

[DollarvsPounds]

**** Is there any possibility of happening such kind of transactions or is impossible with the Crypto concept where there is no where more than double spending( suppose 4 similar transactions) happens with different transaction number and validated properly. *****

 

Request a little more technical explanation what if these kind of transactions happen or these kind of transactions never occur in Ripple network??

[ZX81_1k]

I'm confident this would not happen because it would render the blockchain consensus mechanism meaningless thereby destroying the trust and, consequently, the value of the XRP. 

However, it could be achieved through a 51% attack on the network in theory but in reality it couldn't happen as ownership of the consensus validation nodes would be spread across as many unrelated companies as possible so no one company controls the majority of the consensus network. 

Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin?wprov=sfla1 and scroll down to Decentralization section. This explains it for Bitcoin and there's a link there to a Double Spending article. While this uses a different validation method to XRP, the principal is the same.