Adam Back Warns BIP-110 Ordinals Fix Could Create Bigger Risks
Blockstream’s Adam Back said BIP-110, a proposal aimed at addressing arbitrary data spam on Bitcoin, could be used to freeze user funds. The proposal’s creator argues that safeguards are included to prevent that outcome.
What happened?
Blockstream’s Adam Back said BIP-110, a proposal aimed at addressing arbitrary data spam on Bitcoin, could be used to freeze user funds. The proposal’s creator argues that safeguards are included to prevent that outcome.
Why it matters
The dispute matters because it touches a recurring tension in Bitcoin: how to respond to non-payment data use on the network without weakening user control or changing the system’s neutrality. If a proposed spam fix can be interpreted as enabling restrictions on funds, critics may see it as a trade-off that is too costly for the ecosystem.
Blockstream co-founder Adam Back has opposed BIP-110, a Bitcoin proposal presented as a way to address arbitrary data spam associated with Ordinals activity. Back warned that the fix could introduce a more serious problem by creating a path for user funds to be frozen.
The dispute matters because it touches a recurring tension in Bitcoin: how to respond to non-payment data use on the network without weakening user control or changing the system’s neutrality. If a proposed spam fix can be interpreted as enabling restrictions on funds, critics may see it as a trade-off that is too costly for the ecosystem.
The proposal’s creator pushed back on Back’s concern, arguing that BIP-110 includes safeguards designed to prevent the kind of fund-freezing scenario Back described. That leaves the debate centered not only on the goal of reducing arbitrary data spam, but also on whether the proposed protections are strong enough.
Ordinals-related activity has repeatedly sparked debate among Bitcoin users over block space, fees, and what kinds of data should be acceptable on the network. BIP-110 now adds another layer to that discussion by raising questions about how far protocol-level or policy-level responses should go.
For now, the disagreement shows that any attempt to limit perceived spam on Bitcoin is likely to face close scrutiny from developers and infrastructure figures. The core issue is whether BIP-110 solves a real problem without creating a larger risk for users.