# Great Consensus Cleanup Revival

**URL:** <https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710>\
**Category:** Protocol Design\
**Created:** [March 24, 2024, 5:29pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710 "2024-03-24T17:29:42Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 53

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![AntoineP](https://delvingbitcoin.org/user_avatar/delvingbitcoin.org/antoinep/32/483_2.png) [@AntoineP](https://delvingbitcoin.org/u/AntoineP)\
**Post date:** [November 26, 2024, 4:26pm UTC](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710/53 "2024-11-26T16:26:00Z")

</div>

I think the Consensus Cleanup should include a fix for the [Murch-Zawy attack](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/zawy-s-alternating-timestamp-attack/1062#variant-on-zawys-attack-2), in the form of requiring the timestamp of the last block in a retarget period to never be lower than the timestamp of the first block in this same period. In other words, the time span between the first and last block of a retarget period should never be negative.

[We discussed it](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/zawy-s-alternating-timestamp-attack/1062/3) in this thread already back in August, but i figured i should mention it here as well.

---

_[View the full topic](https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/great-consensus-cleanup-revival/710)._