diff options
| author | ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> | 2019-03-18 04:22:52 +0000 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2019-03-18 04:23:01 +0000 |
| commit | 139ee2e4043b55701a4d39d40ee5c18b12a11c88 (patch) | |
| tree | 481f0eff6d2347eb02d8a4a80d60bbf45ff0c0d0 | |
| parent | f1c4251e6654cb1095016dddb72719a1a39be96b (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-139ee2e4043b55701a4d39d40ee5c18b12a11c88.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-139ee2e4043b55701a4d39d40ee5c18b12a11c88.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Pre BIP: Solving for spam and other abuse with an HTLB
| -rw-r--r-- | 34/c7cc39a9853ac923cd12f90eff7934e09e4502 | 114 |
1 files changed, 114 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/34/c7cc39a9853ac923cd12f90eff7934e09e4502 b/34/c7cc39a9853ac923cd12f90eff7934e09e4502 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..77d896423 --- /dev/null +++ b/34/c7cc39a9853ac923cd12f90eff7934e09e4502 @@ -0,0 +1,114 @@ +Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBB1328FC + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 18 Mar 2019 04:23:01 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-40130.protonmail.ch (mail-40130.protonmail.ch + [185.70.40.130]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF1E3D3 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Mon, 18 Mar 2019 04:23:00 +0000 (UTC) +Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 04:22:52 +0000 +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; + s=default; t=1552882979; + bh=HS9/Si0PJn40Eujuup3OvMjn5U/baXDG1XE0hiCeu5A=; + h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: + Feedback-ID:From; + b=ncKP2U0LzD1qaA/emFh4itEg03I5FAARVOgaVlNH5eQOUhqP9jNklY5vkde1KFjR2 + 0mtuSqahFigDRRWAmIR1ZiH/iZXZ13SVbgNL3eeIVlM6Z9WuL672GJrKOl+Xc3hdlh + anJlbjxpacgji7vN18uwRG4CJNwgk1rSSZd0DzuM= +To: Alistair Mann <al@pectw.net> +From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> +Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com> +Message-ID: <9cdqgzZg7-d1XIJvomJKugN8JoluRs-ExKjP2bAybjhEhBxAkkPDQwH0JkWi0sZYFCXClIstKC5gTXBarXspCldSBWVGkOt_ff-DPDEdEW0=@protonmail.com> +In-Reply-To: <119468467.Oh7zB5fVM7@dprfs-d5766> +References: <12139028.TiJ4v5RR02@dprfs-d5766> + <HT17PPZYL6SJ91sO2mrEmAZ6RaCoAPBSmF3cphDMx5bqjCFNgbfof5l-TfAS5RsfuyPEV_xUqyJDbfCONeefog8Tz3eLz4NhXGPDiKzTKHg=@protonmail.com> + <119468467.Oh7zB5fVM7@dprfs-d5766> +Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail +MIME-Version: 1.0 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW, URI_NOVOWEL autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 +X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on + smtp1.linux-foundation.org +X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 17:04:52 +0000 +Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Pre BIP: Solving for spam and other abuse with an + HTLB +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 +Precedence: list +List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>, + <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2019 04:23:02 -0000 + +Funding Transaction Pattern is how I name it; I am unaware if this pattern = +has been named before. +I know gmax created Taproot precisely as an optimization of this pattern, s= +o I presume he is aware of it, and might know a proper name for such. +It is massively ambiguous to call it "gmax technique" as that name could ap= +ply to many, many techniques. + +Regards, +ZmnSCPxj + + +Sent with ProtonMail Secure Email. + +=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me= +ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 +On Monday, March 18, 2019 12:11 AM, Alistair Mann <al@pectw.net> wrote: + +> Many thanks for your thoughts, ZmnSCPxj. +> +> > I believe there is indeed an important usecase for HTLB over HTLC, whic= +h is +> > to improve the anonymity set. An HTLB over HTLC would be indistinguisha= +ble +> > onchain from other uses of HTLC; assuming that HTLCs have other uses, t= +his +> > is a (small?) plus to privacy. +> > Note that the redundant <digest> would have to be given by Alice to Bob= +, +> > since using a standardized one will also reveal use of HTLB over HTLC +> > instead of hiding it among other HTLC UTXOs. +> +> Both these are good observations and I'll act on them. +> +> > Another thing to improve privacy would be to apply the Funding Transact= +ion +> > pattern: https://zmnscpxj.github.io/offchain/generalized.html +> +> <snip> +> +> I've not read of the FTP before; I welcome it, and take on board that it +> improves privacy by keeping a script offline. My first thought is that do= +esn't +> affect the suggested BIP, so my next update here won't include it. I reco= +gnise +> it would improve mainnet use of scripts though, so do expect to return to= + it. +> +> Cheers, +> +> -------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------------------------------------------------------------= +---------------------- +> +> Alistair Mann + + + |