diff options
| author | Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com> | 2018-08-14 11:34:13 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2018-08-14 18:34:50 +0000 |
| commit | b98594d1df01d9fa62dce951ef689c33224ab2af (patch) | |
| tree | 2b6575972b02315a6045b9510ba608c3bcf38ca6 | |
| parent | d479d8a7a2f3463993f25863b3de1628283ecd00 (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-b98594d1df01d9fa62dce951ef689c33224ab2af.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-b98594d1df01d9fa62dce951ef689c33224ab2af.zip | |
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix
| -rw-r--r-- | c3/af886b75e971c38e1b6c38e0020b140e852005 | 120 |
1 files changed, 120 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/c3/af886b75e971c38e1b6c38e0020b140e852005 b/c3/af886b75e971c38e1b6c38e0020b140e852005 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..975fc8def --- /dev/null +++ b/c3/af886b75e971c38e1b6c38e0020b140e852005 @@ -0,0 +1,120 @@ +Return-Path: <christophera@gmail.com> +Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org + [172.17.192.35]) + by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8AB33CF8 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 14 Aug 2018 18:34:50 +0000 (UTC) +X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 +Received: from mail-oi0-f44.google.com (mail-oi0-f44.google.com + [209.85.218.44]) + by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21FF6735 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 14 Aug 2018 18:34:50 +0000 (UTC) +Received: by mail-oi0-f44.google.com with SMTP id b15-v6so35395465oib.10 + for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>; + Tue, 14 Aug 2018 11:34:50 -0700 (PDT) +DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=lifewithalacrity-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; + h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; + bh=OAMH00fGDL+Y4OZ8QtHznKz7ww+4qqZhqXbk+VuOaCE=; + b=2K9+m+nHHv1E6Mca/dn+94/50MnHFTk1BRakvT8oWmiWufDWTPQ5ehQV0Om1k/lH6a + M7mdhuORyKk0RlIkblxv+/92PnxpDd4cHlK0R5dYAlKTNCHVttZCai0IBbj2DTACdBiD + 5pqvSH9qd0nCynyNH7g0ANQG6iJJaruKh3DnSVg+6up43DX7HI2Pnih2OL8e0xWme3r4 + dN3XDo1FNsqMGaLKMj4b4HpoqXeUAxEObBs7wpZ8PhmNoHNJK0O9EOeHvqauqc0Ka8i6 + TWxJ6yip3iWv4XVbuIqau/gBghYlmQIiGuBJX/vrtB7jSuMAnD/ZBpna4N8chKanpBzI + XH0w== +X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; + d=1e100.net; s=20161025; + h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; + bh=OAMH00fGDL+Y4OZ8QtHznKz7ww+4qqZhqXbk+VuOaCE=; + b=O3ahKqnw+9Dgu1LDB86t9URF0VM+SP6XgSRikcFbwqwXjeO5k6hNfm8YmiWguYzNJc + xpdMWXHCO1fjbM7jOQxq5MkkiDYvx+BE9FxxppxYf5hgj/G7b2t48Hd44yQ7LEWQVaLg + lHSplPEwg0fVXyQAGHvlIfsZDdeq6ZzFsU2ggEDy8pC2iMOFPbNXjvdQZ0wkvTjSK4PU + 6hgEypNmK0d9mMS44+ksUXH8i94+B+w4g4bZMwq5CTUGN7PgVRZLoir2ycRpix6k1532 + F9g6A3wUCd8JdcEpZUVO9iHImaR1kkocdqLgm/9O25Eq0evCCvljSbnj2ppMqlSB1LgL + b6PA== +X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGUsK2xSJ7MYlYLzk0akZNxDQivbNJ9AqDDX4BN2hBfq8LYcwNX + SCDiRVznMkmFoUUJt1hYoOHJCIB29u2QltlZ7by48o1J +X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPyMZifdsAXHkljMfafIwkxIc4OySxKtE/QxCo7cbVizRLsjnriEKNXLZC4miY++s9zkRvpMCXfZSD8ruBvb14k= +X-Received: by 2002:aca:b3d6:: with SMTP id + c205-v6mr25486825oif.133.1534271689095; + Tue, 14 Aug 2018 11:34:49 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +From: Christopher Allen <ChristopherA@lifewithalacrity.com> +Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 11:34:13 -0700 +Message-ID: <CACrqygD_5jpkTvvcFo7eHxZfiH4evzZQc=YB=opBo6M_0EsZTQ@mail.gmail.com> +To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000004826105736977c3" +X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, + DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, + RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE 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: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 13:28:40 +0000 +Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Claiming an OP_RETURN Prefix +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: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 18:34:50 -0000 + +--00000000000004826105736977c3 +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +On August 5, 2018 9:11:26 PM UTC, Lautaro Dragan via bitcoin-dev +<bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: +>Should we actually be using the BIP process to claim a prefix? + +I recommend against using an op_return prefix, as they allow for +transaction censorship. + +In fact, in our case, where we use an IPFS hash in an op_return, we remove +the IPFS multihash prefix information to post a =E2=80=9Cbare=E2=80=9D SHA2= +56 hash to look +like many other hashes being posted in op_returns, to minimize any ability +for a miner to identify our transaction. The more projects that do this the +better =E2=80=94 a form of herd immunity. + +Longer term I=E2=80=99m looking for more responsible ways to publish this h= +ash, for +instance have the hash be in the witness script data, so that it can be +easily purged from nodes that do not wish to preserve it and prevent block +size bloat. However, to do so everyone has to do it the same way, ideally +have it look like any other transaction. I=E2=80=99ve not quite seen a soli= +d +proposal for best practices here. + +=E2=80=94 Christopher Allen + +--00000000000004826105736977c3 +Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<div dir=3D"ltr">On August 5, 2018 9:11:26 PM UTC, Lautaro Dragan via bitco= +in-dev <bitcoin-dev at <a href=3D"http://lists.linuxfoundation.org">list= +s.linuxfoundation.org</a>> wrote:<br>>Should we actually be using the= + BIP process to claim a prefix?<br><br>I recommend against using an op_retu= +rn prefix, as they allow for transaction censorship.<div><br></div><div>In = +fact, in our case, where we use an IPFS hash in an op_return, we remove the= + IPFS multihash prefix information to post a =E2=80=9Cbare=E2=80=9D SHA256 = +hash to look like many other hashes being posted in op_returns, to minimize= + any ability for a miner to identify our transaction. The more projects tha= +t do this the better =E2=80=94 a form of herd immunity.</div><div><br></div= +><div>Longer term I=E2=80=99m looking for more responsible ways to publish = +this hash, for instance have the hash be in the witness script data, so tha= +t it can be easily purged from nodes that do not wish to preserve it and pr= +event block size bloat. However, to do so everyone has to do it the same wa= +y, ideally have it look like any other transaction. I=E2=80=99ve not quite = +seen a solid proposal for best practices here.</div><div><br></div><div>=E2= +=80=94 Christopher Allen</div></div> + +--00000000000004826105736977c3-- + |