CBP Forks and Network Upgrades 2

Question 1

What distinguishes a User-Activated Soft Fork (UASF) from a Miner-Activated Soft Fork (MASF)?

Accepted Answer

UASF is enforced by full nodes regardless of miner support, while MASF relies on miners to signal readiness

Answer

A UASF activates based on full node enforcement on a specific date, bypassing the need for miner majority support.

Question 2

During the 2017 Bitcoin scaling debate, BIP 148 was a proposal for which type of activation?

Accepted Answer

A UASF to force SegWit activation by August 1, 2017

Answer

BIP 148 specified that nodes would reject blocks not signaling SegWit support starting August 1, 2017, making it a UASF.

Question 3

What is a 'velvet fork' in the context of Bitcoin protocol upgrades?

Accepted Answer

An upgrade that is backward compatible and does not split the chain even if not all nodes upgrade

Answer

A velvet fork is a protocol upgrade designed so that non-upgraded nodes can still participate without being excluded from the network.

Question 4

What happened to the Bitcoin XT fork proposal in 2015?

Accepted Answer

It was abandoned after failing to gain sufficient node and miner adoption

Answer

Bitcoin XT proposed 8MB blocks but failed to achieve the 75% miner threshold needed for activation, leading to its abandonment.

Question 5

In a soft fork, which group's behavior change is strictly required to enforce the new rules?

Accepted Answer

A majority of miners must enforce the new stricter rules

Answer

In a soft fork, miners enforcing the new stricter rules ensure that non-compliant blocks are orphaned, making old nodes still accept the valid chain.

(CBP) Certified Bitcoin Professional Practice Test