# Play Attacks and possible mitigations

**URL:** https://forum.grin.mw/t/play-attacks-and-possible-mitigations/7527
**Category:** Development and Technical Discussion
**Created:** [July 10, 2020, 7:00am UTC](https://forum.grin.mw/t/play-attacks-and-possible-mitigations/7527 "2020-07-10T07:00:41Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 41

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![david](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex036/user_avatar/forum.grin.mw/david/32/660_2.png) [@david](https://forum.grin.mw/u/david)
#### Post date: [July 14, 2020, 5:46pm UTC](https://forum.grin.mw/t/play-attacks-and-possible-mitigations/7527/41 "2020-07-14T17:46:21Z")

</div>

> [@antioch](#):
>
> But during this window you would may still want to mitigate by spending, rather than risk waiting for expiration.

At risk of what? You just consider the invoice paid unless it officially expires. What is the real concern with play attacks? I thought it was that the receiver could arbitrarily play the transaction far in the future after claiming it failed? Just forbid canceling the transaction unless it’s expired (and shorter expiration times could be used for invoices, if necessary).

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.grin.mw/t/play-attacks-and-possible-mitigations/7527)._