Which ephemeral anchor script should lightning use?

The concern highlighted revolves around the vulnerability of channel counterparties engaging in fee griefing within the context of cryptocurrency transactions, particularly affecting HTLC (Hash Time Locked Contracts) payments. This form of attack is most concerning when executed by a channel counterparty, as they stand to gain financially by forcing a victim to claim a payment via the timeout path, potentially leading to profit from stolen HTLCs if the victim is unwilling or unable to increase the transaction fee sufficiently.

The risk of such attacks is not limited to channel counterparties; however, their potential impact and benefit from executing such an attack are significantly higher. In contrast, random individuals or miners engaging in similar actions do not inherently benefit financially and bear a risk of losing funds without any intended gain. Despite this, there exists a possibility for griefing by any network participant, which could lead to financial loss for victims forced to pay higher transaction fees under duress. An example of a related issue is provided through an instance of accidental pinning observed in the wild, linked to Peter Todd's observation (accidental pinning), showcasing the real-world implications of such vulnerabilities.

To mitigate the risk of widespread exploitation of this vulnerability beyond the channel counterparties, the implementation of a keyed anchor is suggested. This approach aims to limit exposure to such fee griefing attacks, confining the potential attackers to only those directly involved in the channel, thereby reducing the overall risk posed by external parties on the network. This strategy reflects a targeted effort to enhance security and protect against specific forms of financial exploitation within the cryptocurrency ecosystem.