a man Ryan
2.6K posts

a man Ryan
@amanRyan808
I got a mullet now.. and some day... a skullet. 🐒
Honolulu, HI 가입일 Nisan 2022
121 팔로잉369 팔로워


@skillz17q Well , I wouldn't expect too many people to see what you're posting.
English

@topkekius Do you know about Donny and his connection to Con Air?
English

@JoelKatz @xrpresso_io This one time I deposited a check to somebody, and it cleared over the weekend. i deposited a check and was told I would get partial draws a full payment within a period of up to ten days.
GIF
English

This is true, but is mitigated by a number of factors.
For one thing, everyone has an equal opportunity to do this. Transactions are publicly visible before a ledger closes.
Running a validator does not help you do this unless multiple validators conspire. If multiple validators did conspire, or a single validator attempted it, it would be *very* obvious to everyone exactly who was doing this and that validator would be immediately removed from everyone's trust lists.
Validators sign all their proposals and validations. So there would be clear evidence that a particular validator was proposing transactions that others had not seen broadcast or had seen broadcast too late.
Any such attempt would have to be in public. To do it without conspiring validators, you'd need to broadcast multiple carefully constructed sandwiching transactions. These would all have to be signed and made public.
So far as I know, there still have not been reports of this being attempted other than as a proof of concept. The core problem is that it isn't profitable unless there is both high liquidity (to have volumes worth the effort) and low liquidity (to be able to move the price measurably at reasonable cost).
If people think it's necessary, my best idea for how to combat this is a transaction reservation scheme. You reserve a slot by specifying a ledger sequence number and a transaction ID and paying a reservation fee. If your reservation transaction suceeds and you broadcast your transaction before that ledger closes, your transaction is guaranteed to go before any transaction that did not reserve a slot in that ledger.
This guarantees that you can execute your transaction ahead of any transaction that was formed after your transaction was disclosed. You would use this approach any time you want to perform a transaction that you want to ensure cannot be sandwiched or front run. It does require you to submit two transactions for each one you want to run in this way.
English

A serious front-running issue continues on the XRPL that disadvantages regular users.
Validators and well-connected nodes can view transactions in the pre-validation queue before a ledger closes.
They can quickly analyze a pending trade, determine if front-running or sandwiching it is profitable, and then spam their own transactions to try and game their position in the canonical order for that ledger.
Because the final ordering within each ledger is based on a known, deterministic formula involving transaction hashes, submitting multiple transactions increases the chances of landing in a favorable slot relative to the target trade.
This allows sophisticated actors to reliably extract value from other users’ trades — particularly on the DEX and AMM — often through sandwich attacks that worsen slippage for the original trader.
XRPL documentation states that the order of transactions is designed to be unpredictable in order to discourage front-running. However, research and real-world observation have shown that this protection is not sufficient. The mechanism can still be exploited, especially by those with faster or privileged visibility into pending transactions.
The result is an uneven playing field.
Everyday users and traders using popular wallets and dApps are left exposed to this form of value extraction, while those running advanced setups with validator access can act on information others don’t have in the same timeframe.
This has been a known topic in the community for years, with discussions around transaction queue visibility and potential privacy improvements.
While the XRPL has strong fundamentals — fast settlement, low fees, and native decentralized exchange functionality — issues like this undermine trust and fairness for participants who simply want to trade without being systematically disadvantaged.
Front-running of this nature is widely viewed as unethical in traditional markets. In crypto it exists in a gray area, but that doesn’t make the impact on users any less real.
The community has already surfaced ideas for mitigation, including better privacy around pending transactions and refinements to how ordering or visibility works. These discussions deserve continued attention and resources.
@XRPLF @Vet_X0 @JoelKatz — this is an active problem that affects user experience and adoption. Prioritizing improvements around transaction visibility and queue privacy would go a long way toward making XRPL fairer for everyone.
Until meaningful progress is made, this remains a drag on the ecosystem.
#XRPL ripple:native
English

The only thing we lost is disco and nobody is complaining.😑
Dookiefied@dookasaurus
Thing is, we've lost something since the 1970s. People don't do cool like @WilliamShatner. Now they only do outrageous. One is effortless, the other, a cry for help.
English

@xplorable @DOGEQEEN That's great for another country. we're talking about America here.
English

Close your eyes and just listen to it. it's actually pretty good.
Rossco Hopewell 🇺🇸@RosscoHopewell
@Chimpnnout Damn Shaniqua Daqueefa, settle TF down, you're foamin' at da mouf. Here's her theme song (also download here)@rosscohopewell" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">suno.com/@rosscohopewell
English

@TiffanyFong Well, you didn't die from drinking makeup remover, so I guess you're alright.
English



















