BitcoinBCH a company that focuses on Bitcoin Cash has been likely misleading people by making them believe that it is easy to carry out BTC double spends.

The CEO of the firm released a video on YouTube on December 18. The video purportedly revealed the way BTC Point of Sale (PoS) wallet of TravelByBit misleads merchants to believe that they receive payment prior to the conclusion of a transaction.

Recently, a representative of TravelByBit said that there is insurance for merchants utilizing its service against fraud and there won’t be loss of money. According to the founder of the company, the exploitation of their system’s design by numerous people will make the firm to stop supporting BTC and BCH on-chain transactions in its PoS solution.

The founder maintained that there is no feasibility for the acceptance of on-chain payments in in-store settings and needs a compromise between security and convenience. This is because people will not be interested in waiting in line for a minimum of ten minutes for the confirmation of a transaction prior to getting hold of the product.

The founder continued that Lightning Network can solve the problem. He maintained that it can deal with the lack of practicality in waiting for transaction to be concluded during the process of making payments using cryptocurrencies in physical stores. He noted the following:

“If we remove the online travel booking transactions and you look at the number of transactions purely from a retail perspective we, over 47% of transactions around Australia the last 3 months was done over the lightning network.”

The video refused to highlight that unconfirmed transactions are not final, but suggests that the flaw in the design of the wallet is a Bitcoin security flaw that ensures double-spends. Hayden Otto said that merchants need to “immediately cease accepting Bitcoin and switch to Bitcoin Cash.”

A function known as RBF helps with the replacement of a non-final (unconfirmed) transaction on the blockchain with another one having a higher fee. This feature has been criticized due to the enabling of an unconfirmed transaction double spends.

However, it is still possible for unconfirmed transactions to be double-spent without this feature. The way to achieve this was analysed and published in 2015 by Bram Cohen. Generally, there is no finality with unconfirmed transactions and should not be accepted as payment.

In recent times, Bitcoin.com that centers on BCH reported that BCH eliminated the RBF feature from its code. Hence, the website said that it is not safe to use BCH unconfirmed transactions. The article says that:

“The Bitcoin Cash community believes that zero-confirmation transactions are reliable and secure.”

The video shows the CEO performing a BTC payment to a merchant in a store without RBF. Then a big green checkmark appeared on the wallet of the merchant, misleading the user to believe that she received the payment.

Later, the CEO said in the video that it is dangerous to be able to reverse Bitcoin transactions. Such statement erroneously means that a transaction was reversed. Whereas, the transaction that was changed was not confirmed, making it non-final while the protocol functioned as expected.

He likewise suggested in the video that “Bitcoin Cash fixes this,” talking about unconfirmed transaction double-spends. However, the founder of the firm suggested that:

“Nothing stops BCH miners from replacing transactions right now, as it’s more of a gentlemen’s agreement, but once in a while “RBF-like” double spends do happen on the BCH network. It’s important to note RBF is not a protocol consensus feature, it’s a node policy that any Bitcoin or Bitcoin cash miner can choose to run and it does not affect the reliability of payments.”

Further, the founder maintained that the hashrate distribution gap between BTC and BCH likewise impacts the security, and plays in favour of BTC. He talked about the role of tribalism in hindering innovation in the crypto space:

“Honestly, I think the community should focus on helping build and grow wider adoption across the various ecosystems and not focus on running attacks on each other’s bitcoin projects. It creates a tit for tat scenario which erodes the entire space as a whole. People should be free to transaction in any crypto they want and help contribute to the ecosystems as builders.”

The BCH community has been accused of spreading misleading information before now. In April 2018, Cointelegraph reported the accusation against Bitcoin.com as regards the misleading of buyers into buying BCH in place of BTC through the presentation of the cryptocurrencies in an unusual manner.