Are lightweight LN wallets vulnerable to transaction withholding?












2















As far as I know, LN requires the user to watch the blockchain in order to perform penalty in time. However, running full node is probably a heavy burden to some users, especially to mobile phones. I once heard that improved protocol for lightweight wallet (like Neutrino) can solve this problem, but I also heard that such lightweight wallet protocol still implies trusting the full node or server which provides service. Especially, a malicious full node can hide transactions from its clients, which seems to be a potential threat to lightweight LN wallets.










share|improve this question



























    2















    As far as I know, LN requires the user to watch the blockchain in order to perform penalty in time. However, running full node is probably a heavy burden to some users, especially to mobile phones. I once heard that improved protocol for lightweight wallet (like Neutrino) can solve this problem, but I also heard that such lightweight wallet protocol still implies trusting the full node or server which provides service. Especially, a malicious full node can hide transactions from its clients, which seems to be a potential threat to lightweight LN wallets.










    share|improve this question

























      2












      2








      2


      1






      As far as I know, LN requires the user to watch the blockchain in order to perform penalty in time. However, running full node is probably a heavy burden to some users, especially to mobile phones. I once heard that improved protocol for lightweight wallet (like Neutrino) can solve this problem, but I also heard that such lightweight wallet protocol still implies trusting the full node or server which provides service. Especially, a malicious full node can hide transactions from its clients, which seems to be a potential threat to lightweight LN wallets.










      share|improve this question














      As far as I know, LN requires the user to watch the blockchain in order to perform penalty in time. However, running full node is probably a heavy burden to some users, especially to mobile phones. I once heard that improved protocol for lightweight wallet (like Neutrino) can solve this problem, but I also heard that such lightweight wallet protocol still implies trusting the full node or server which provides service. Especially, a malicious full node can hide transactions from its clients, which seems to be a potential threat to lightweight LN wallets.







      security lightning-network thin-clients






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked yesterday









      Chris ChenChris Chen

      1267




      1267






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          11














          There is no substitute in terms of security and trust for running a full node.



          There are different "lightweight client" concepts. Some of them are...



          BIP37 (bloom filter):




          • [minus] With current used false-positive rates, peers may learn all wallet addresses

          • [minus] Usually done over an unencrypted channel (p2p 8333), ISPs, etc. learn also all your addresses

          • [plus] client can validate if the transaction(s) were in a block (merkleblock)

          • [plus] clients keep a blockchain with headers only can at least check PoW

          • [plus] uses only little bandwidth

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are possible

          • [plus]"Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Neutrino (Compact Block Filters BIP158):




          • [plus] fewer privacy implications then BIP37 since filtering happens locally

          • [minus] needs more resources (basic filters from the genesis block up to block 560000 require ~3.5GB space/bandwidth)

          • [minus] more bandwidth consumption because full blocks must be downloaded (rather then Merkle-"blocks" in BIP37)

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are still possible (though more complicated) because the block filters are not committed to the blocks (would require a soft-fork). Not committed means, peers can fake filters and make you miss relevant transactions (can be [partially] mitigated by comparing filters from different peers)

          • [minus] No solution for mempool filtering (can't show "incoming transactions" reliable)

          • [plus] "Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Centralized Validation (Bitpay, Samourai, etc.)




          • [minus] Full trust in the company/server (they know all your addresses)

          • [minus] Can hide back transactions

          • [minus] Can artificially create transactions

          • [plus] Minimal bandwidth consumption




          Some application mix different approaches (like Electrum does Merkle-tree checks and keeps a headers-only-chain to mitigate the "can artificially create transactions" problem).



          Conclusion



          If you want to watch the blockchain without trusted third parties, you must run a full node (could be pruned though <10GB space requirement, but lightning implementations are not fully compatible yet).



          If (and only if) BIP158 block filters get committed (though a soft fork, hash in blocks coinbase of similar), hiding transactions through peers, providing filters, would no longer be possible.



          Recommended practical approach




          • Buy a tiny computer (Raspberry, Odroid, Pine64)

          • Buy a >500GB SSD (USB3 SSD, ~100USD in 2019)


            • NO,.. don't use your old HDD (your sync time will be 20 times slower).



          • Install Bitcoin Core (there are pre-build ARM64 binaries)

          • Run with a large -dbcache (if you have 2GB+ RAM)

          • Sync the chain

          • zzzZZZ (takes maybe a week)

          • enjoy being a real Bitcoiner (by avoiding all trusted third parties)






          share|improve this answer


























          • I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday











          • Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

            – Jonas Schnelli
            yesterday













          • The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday











          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "308"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f85557%2fare-lightweight-ln-wallets-vulnerable-to-transaction-withholding%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          11














          There is no substitute in terms of security and trust for running a full node.



          There are different "lightweight client" concepts. Some of them are...



          BIP37 (bloom filter):




          • [minus] With current used false-positive rates, peers may learn all wallet addresses

          • [minus] Usually done over an unencrypted channel (p2p 8333), ISPs, etc. learn also all your addresses

          • [plus] client can validate if the transaction(s) were in a block (merkleblock)

          • [plus] clients keep a blockchain with headers only can at least check PoW

          • [plus] uses only little bandwidth

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are possible

          • [plus]"Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Neutrino (Compact Block Filters BIP158):




          • [plus] fewer privacy implications then BIP37 since filtering happens locally

          • [minus] needs more resources (basic filters from the genesis block up to block 560000 require ~3.5GB space/bandwidth)

          • [minus] more bandwidth consumption because full blocks must be downloaded (rather then Merkle-"blocks" in BIP37)

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are still possible (though more complicated) because the block filters are not committed to the blocks (would require a soft-fork). Not committed means, peers can fake filters and make you miss relevant transactions (can be [partially] mitigated by comparing filters from different peers)

          • [minus] No solution for mempool filtering (can't show "incoming transactions" reliable)

          • [plus] "Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Centralized Validation (Bitpay, Samourai, etc.)




          • [minus] Full trust in the company/server (they know all your addresses)

          • [minus] Can hide back transactions

          • [minus] Can artificially create transactions

          • [plus] Minimal bandwidth consumption




          Some application mix different approaches (like Electrum does Merkle-tree checks and keeps a headers-only-chain to mitigate the "can artificially create transactions" problem).



          Conclusion



          If you want to watch the blockchain without trusted third parties, you must run a full node (could be pruned though <10GB space requirement, but lightning implementations are not fully compatible yet).



          If (and only if) BIP158 block filters get committed (though a soft fork, hash in blocks coinbase of similar), hiding transactions through peers, providing filters, would no longer be possible.



          Recommended practical approach




          • Buy a tiny computer (Raspberry, Odroid, Pine64)

          • Buy a >500GB SSD (USB3 SSD, ~100USD in 2019)


            • NO,.. don't use your old HDD (your sync time will be 20 times slower).



          • Install Bitcoin Core (there are pre-build ARM64 binaries)

          • Run with a large -dbcache (if you have 2GB+ RAM)

          • Sync the chain

          • zzzZZZ (takes maybe a week)

          • enjoy being a real Bitcoiner (by avoiding all trusted third parties)






          share|improve this answer


























          • I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday











          • Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

            – Jonas Schnelli
            yesterday













          • The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday
















          11














          There is no substitute in terms of security and trust for running a full node.



          There are different "lightweight client" concepts. Some of them are...



          BIP37 (bloom filter):




          • [minus] With current used false-positive rates, peers may learn all wallet addresses

          • [minus] Usually done over an unencrypted channel (p2p 8333), ISPs, etc. learn also all your addresses

          • [plus] client can validate if the transaction(s) were in a block (merkleblock)

          • [plus] clients keep a blockchain with headers only can at least check PoW

          • [plus] uses only little bandwidth

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are possible

          • [plus]"Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Neutrino (Compact Block Filters BIP158):




          • [plus] fewer privacy implications then BIP37 since filtering happens locally

          • [minus] needs more resources (basic filters from the genesis block up to block 560000 require ~3.5GB space/bandwidth)

          • [minus] more bandwidth consumption because full blocks must be downloaded (rather then Merkle-"blocks" in BIP37)

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are still possible (though more complicated) because the block filters are not committed to the blocks (would require a soft-fork). Not committed means, peers can fake filters and make you miss relevant transactions (can be [partially] mitigated by comparing filters from different peers)

          • [minus] No solution for mempool filtering (can't show "incoming transactions" reliable)

          • [plus] "Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Centralized Validation (Bitpay, Samourai, etc.)




          • [minus] Full trust in the company/server (they know all your addresses)

          • [minus] Can hide back transactions

          • [minus] Can artificially create transactions

          • [plus] Minimal bandwidth consumption




          Some application mix different approaches (like Electrum does Merkle-tree checks and keeps a headers-only-chain to mitigate the "can artificially create transactions" problem).



          Conclusion



          If you want to watch the blockchain without trusted third parties, you must run a full node (could be pruned though <10GB space requirement, but lightning implementations are not fully compatible yet).



          If (and only if) BIP158 block filters get committed (though a soft fork, hash in blocks coinbase of similar), hiding transactions through peers, providing filters, would no longer be possible.



          Recommended practical approach




          • Buy a tiny computer (Raspberry, Odroid, Pine64)

          • Buy a >500GB SSD (USB3 SSD, ~100USD in 2019)


            • NO,.. don't use your old HDD (your sync time will be 20 times slower).



          • Install Bitcoin Core (there are pre-build ARM64 binaries)

          • Run with a large -dbcache (if you have 2GB+ RAM)

          • Sync the chain

          • zzzZZZ (takes maybe a week)

          • enjoy being a real Bitcoiner (by avoiding all trusted third parties)






          share|improve this answer


























          • I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday











          • Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

            – Jonas Schnelli
            yesterday













          • The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday














          11












          11








          11







          There is no substitute in terms of security and trust for running a full node.



          There are different "lightweight client" concepts. Some of them are...



          BIP37 (bloom filter):




          • [minus] With current used false-positive rates, peers may learn all wallet addresses

          • [minus] Usually done over an unencrypted channel (p2p 8333), ISPs, etc. learn also all your addresses

          • [plus] client can validate if the transaction(s) were in a block (merkleblock)

          • [plus] clients keep a blockchain with headers only can at least check PoW

          • [plus] uses only little bandwidth

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are possible

          • [plus]"Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Neutrino (Compact Block Filters BIP158):




          • [plus] fewer privacy implications then BIP37 since filtering happens locally

          • [minus] needs more resources (basic filters from the genesis block up to block 560000 require ~3.5GB space/bandwidth)

          • [minus] more bandwidth consumption because full blocks must be downloaded (rather then Merkle-"blocks" in BIP37)

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are still possible (though more complicated) because the block filters are not committed to the blocks (would require a soft-fork). Not committed means, peers can fake filters and make you miss relevant transactions (can be [partially] mitigated by comparing filters from different peers)

          • [minus] No solution for mempool filtering (can't show "incoming transactions" reliable)

          • [plus] "Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Centralized Validation (Bitpay, Samourai, etc.)




          • [minus] Full trust in the company/server (they know all your addresses)

          • [minus] Can hide back transactions

          • [minus] Can artificially create transactions

          • [plus] Minimal bandwidth consumption




          Some application mix different approaches (like Electrum does Merkle-tree checks and keeps a headers-only-chain to mitigate the "can artificially create transactions" problem).



          Conclusion



          If you want to watch the blockchain without trusted third parties, you must run a full node (could be pruned though <10GB space requirement, but lightning implementations are not fully compatible yet).



          If (and only if) BIP158 block filters get committed (though a soft fork, hash in blocks coinbase of similar), hiding transactions through peers, providing filters, would no longer be possible.



          Recommended practical approach




          • Buy a tiny computer (Raspberry, Odroid, Pine64)

          • Buy a >500GB SSD (USB3 SSD, ~100USD in 2019)


            • NO,.. don't use your old HDD (your sync time will be 20 times slower).



          • Install Bitcoin Core (there are pre-build ARM64 binaries)

          • Run with a large -dbcache (if you have 2GB+ RAM)

          • Sync the chain

          • zzzZZZ (takes maybe a week)

          • enjoy being a real Bitcoiner (by avoiding all trusted third parties)






          share|improve this answer















          There is no substitute in terms of security and trust for running a full node.



          There are different "lightweight client" concepts. Some of them are...



          BIP37 (bloom filter):




          • [minus] With current used false-positive rates, peers may learn all wallet addresses

          • [minus] Usually done over an unencrypted channel (p2p 8333), ISPs, etc. learn also all your addresses

          • [plus] client can validate if the transaction(s) were in a block (merkleblock)

          • [plus] clients keep a blockchain with headers only can at least check PoW

          • [plus] uses only little bandwidth

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are possible

          • [plus]"Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Neutrino (Compact Block Filters BIP158):




          • [plus] fewer privacy implications then BIP37 since filtering happens locally

          • [minus] needs more resources (basic filters from the genesis block up to block 560000 require ~3.5GB space/bandwidth)

          • [minus] more bandwidth consumption because full blocks must be downloaded (rather then Merkle-"blocks" in BIP37)

          • [minus] Hiding back transactions are still possible (though more complicated) because the block filters are not committed to the blocks (would require a soft-fork). Not committed means, peers can fake filters and make you miss relevant transactions (can be [partially] mitigated by comparing filters from different peers)

          • [minus] No solution for mempool filtering (can't show "incoming transactions" reliable)

          • [plus] "Impossible" to fake a transaction


          Centralized Validation (Bitpay, Samourai, etc.)




          • [minus] Full trust in the company/server (they know all your addresses)

          • [minus] Can hide back transactions

          • [minus] Can artificially create transactions

          • [plus] Minimal bandwidth consumption




          Some application mix different approaches (like Electrum does Merkle-tree checks and keeps a headers-only-chain to mitigate the "can artificially create transactions" problem).



          Conclusion



          If you want to watch the blockchain without trusted third parties, you must run a full node (could be pruned though <10GB space requirement, but lightning implementations are not fully compatible yet).



          If (and only if) BIP158 block filters get committed (though a soft fork, hash in blocks coinbase of similar), hiding transactions through peers, providing filters, would no longer be possible.



          Recommended practical approach




          • Buy a tiny computer (Raspberry, Odroid, Pine64)

          • Buy a >500GB SSD (USB3 SSD, ~100USD in 2019)


            • NO,.. don't use your old HDD (your sync time will be 20 times slower).



          • Install Bitcoin Core (there are pre-build ARM64 binaries)

          • Run with a large -dbcache (if you have 2GB+ RAM)

          • Sync the chain

          • zzzZZZ (takes maybe a week)

          • enjoy being a real Bitcoiner (by avoiding all trusted third parties)







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited yesterday









          Community

          1




          1










          answered yesterday









          Jonas SchnelliJonas Schnelli

          5,3201128




          5,3201128













          • I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday











          • Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

            – Jonas Schnelli
            yesterday













          • The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday



















          • I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday











          • Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

            – Jonas Schnelli
            yesterday













          • The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

            – Anonymous
            yesterday

















          I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

          – Anonymous
          yesterday





          I wouldn't say it's impossible to withhold transactions in neutrino, at least in its current implementation.

          – Anonymous
          yesterday













          Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

          – Jonas Schnelli
          yesterday







          Depending on where you get your filters from, if from the p2p network, someone could intercept traffic (MITM) and hand you out "void" filters... but its not easy since maybe BIP157 is in use and clients keep a filters-chain.

          – Jonas Schnelli
          yesterday















          The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

          – Anonymous
          yesterday





          The current implementations are very dumb. It has the ability to do better in the future, but for the moment it's about on par with bip37 in that respect.

          – Anonymous
          yesterday


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Bitcoin Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f85557%2fare-lightweight-ln-wallets-vulnerable-to-transaction-withholding%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Færeyskur hestur Heimild | Tengill | Tilvísanir | LeiðsagnarvalRossið - síða um færeyska hrossið á færeyskuGott ár hjá færeyska hestinum

          He _____ here since 1970 . Answer needed [closed]What does “since he was so high” mean?Meaning of “catch birds for”?How do I ensure “since” takes the meaning I want?“Who cares here” meaningWhat does “right round toward” mean?the time tense (had now been detected)What does the phrase “ring around the roses” mean here?Correct usage of “visited upon”Meaning of “foiled rail sabotage bid”It was the third time I had gone to Rome or It is the third time I had been to Rome

          Slayer Innehåll Historia | Stil, komposition och lyrik | Bandets betydelse och framgångar | Sidoprojekt och samarbeten | Kontroverser | Medlemmar | Utmärkelser och nomineringar | Turnéer och festivaler | Diskografi | Referenser | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmenywww.slayer.net”Metal Massacre vol. 1””Metal Massacre vol. 3””Metal Massacre Volume III””Show No Mercy””Haunting the Chapel””Live Undead””Hell Awaits””Reign in Blood””Reign in Blood””Gold & Platinum – Reign in Blood””Golden Gods Awards Winners”originalet”Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Looks Back On 37-Year Career In New Video Series: Part Two””South of Heaven””Gold & Platinum – South of Heaven””Seasons in the Abyss””Gold & Platinum - Seasons in the Abyss””Divine Intervention””Divine Intervention - Release group by Slayer””Gold & Platinum - Divine Intervention””Live Intrusion””Undisputed Attitude””Abolish Government/Superficial Love””Release “Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer” by Various Artists””Diabolus in Musica””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””God Hates Us All””Systematic - Relationships””War at the Warfield””Gold & Platinum - War at the Warfield””Soundtrack to the Apocalypse””Gold & Platinum - Still Reigning””Metallica, Slayer, Iron Mauden Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Eternal Pyre””Eternal Pyre - Slayer release group””Eternal Pyre””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Bullet-For My Valentine booed at Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Unholy Aliance””The End Of Slayer?””Slayer: We Could Thrash Out Two More Albums If We're Fast Enough...””'The Unholy Alliance: Chapter III' UK Dates Added”originalet”Megadeth And Slayer To Co-Headline 'Canadian Carnage' Trek”originalet”World Painted Blood””Release “World Painted Blood” by Slayer””Metallica Heading To Cinemas””Slayer, Megadeth To Join Forces For 'European Carnage' Tour - Dec. 18, 2010”originalet”Slayer's Hanneman Contracts Acute Infection; Band To Bring In Guest Guitarist””Cannibal Corpse's Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer's Guest Guitarist”originalet”Slayer’s Jeff Hanneman Dead at 49””Dave Lombardo Says He Made Only $67,000 In 2011 While Touring With Slayer””Slayer: We Do Not Agree With Dave Lombardo's Substance Or Timeline Of Events””Slayer Welcomes Drummer Paul Bostaph Back To The Fold””Slayer Hope to Unveil Never-Before-Heard Jeff Hanneman Material on Next Album””Slayer Debut New Song 'Implode' During Surprise Golden Gods Appearance””Release group Repentless by Slayer””Repentless - Slayer - Credits””Slayer””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer - to release comic book "Repentless #1"””Slayer To Release 'Repentless' 6.66" Vinyl Box Set””BREAKING NEWS: Slayer Announce Farewell Tour””Slayer Recruit Lamb of God, Anthrax, Behemoth + Testament for Final Tour””Slayer lägger ner efter 37 år””Slayer Announces Second North American Leg Of 'Final' Tour””Final World Tour””Slayer Announces Final European Tour With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Tour Europe With Lamb of God, Anthrax And Obituary””Slayer To Play 'Last French Show Ever' At Next Year's Hellfst””Slayer's Final World Tour Will Extend Into 2019””Death Angel's Rob Cavestany On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour: 'Some Of Us Could See This Coming'””Testament Has No Plans To Retire Anytime Soon, Says Chuck Billy””Anthrax's Scott Ian On Slayer's 'Farewell' Tour Plans: 'I Was Surprised And I Wasn't Surprised'””Slayer””Slayer's Morbid Schlock””Review/Rock; For Slayer, the Mania Is the Message””Slayer - Biography””Slayer - Reign In Blood”originalet”Dave Lombardo””An exclusive oral history of Slayer”originalet”Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman”originalet”Thinking Out Loud: Slayer's Kerry King on hair metal, Satan and being polite””Slayer Lyrics””Slayer - Biography””Most influential artists for extreme metal music””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dies aged 49””Slatanic Slaughter: A Tribute to Slayer””Gateway to Hell: A Tribute to Slayer””Covered In Blood””Slayer: The Origins of Thrash in San Francisco, CA.””Why They Rule - #6 Slayer”originalet”Guitar World's 100 Greatest Heavy Metal Guitarists Of All Time”originalet”The fans have spoken: Slayer comes out on top in readers' polls”originalet”Tribute to Jeff Hanneman (1964-2013)””Lamb Of God Frontman: We Sound Like A Slayer Rip-Off””BEHEMOTH Frontman Pays Tribute To SLAYER's JEFF HANNEMAN””Slayer, Hatebreed Doing Double Duty On This Year's Ozzfest””System of a Down””Lacuna Coil’s Andrea Ferro Talks Influences, Skateboarding, Band Origins + More””Slayer - Reign in Blood””Into The Lungs of Hell””Slayer rules - en utställning om fans””Slayer and Their Fans Slashed Through a No-Holds-Barred Night at Gas Monkey””Home””Slayer””Gold & Platinum - The Big 4 Live from Sofia, Bulgaria””Exclusive! Interview With Slayer Guitarist Kerry King””2008-02-23: Wiltern, Los Angeles, CA, USA””Slayer's Kerry King To Perform With Megadeth Tonight! - Oct. 21, 2010”originalet”Dave Lombardo - Biography”Slayer Case DismissedArkiveradUltimate Classic Rock: Slayer guitarist Jeff Hanneman dead at 49.”Slayer: "We could never do any thing like Some Kind Of Monster..."””Cannibal Corpse'S Pat O'Brien Will Step In As Slayer'S Guest Guitarist | The Official Slayer Site”originalet”Slayer Wins 'Best Metal' Grammy Award””Slayer Guitarist Jeff Hanneman Dies””Kerrang! Awards 2006 Blog: Kerrang! Hall Of Fame””Kerrang! Awards 2013: Kerrang! Legend”originalet”Metallica, Slayer, Iron Maien Among Winners At Metal Hammer Awards””Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Bullet For My Valentine Booed At Metal Hammer Golden Gods Awards””Metal Storm Awards 2006””Metal Storm Awards 2015””Slayer's Concert History””Slayer - Relationships””Slayer - Releases”Slayers officiella webbplatsSlayer på MusicBrainzOfficiell webbplatsSlayerSlayerr1373445760000 0001 1540 47353068615-5086262726cb13906545x(data)6033143kn20030215029