Return-Path: Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org (smtp3.osuosl.org [140.211.166.136]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CE96C002D for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 13:12:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB0C60BD2 for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 13:12:58 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 6CB0C60BD2 Authentication-Results: smtp3.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=McI6ElGG X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.101 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp3.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp3.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mPNgHEzzUWTZ for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 13:12:57 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 3479F60B4C Received: from mail-4319.protonmail.ch (mail-4319.protonmail.ch [185.70.43.19]) by smtp3.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3479F60B4C for ; Mon, 8 Aug 2022 13:12:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2022 13:12:44 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1659964374; x=1660223574; bh=waz2c+gWjHyu/Zy7FIQoc9+AbvU0mxcrBvmGv163eds=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To: Feedback-ID:Message-ID; b=McI6ElGGCbiAwaapRnjBK/vmJq3rrTGkyzmQH6s8NQrzbPEf9B9/3S8JNbeV4GJz9 sQESwzg2trLmGdpQ2y0rGiZcz44YqhlWAJ3NePZbXWpB9vKotQgBq93A2RAbIvwKdR fbiFgf4aJHFEu/QGee/UTPeNbL7u2ECK/QQDmpSuVvrNCvE47Pp93FZlykOLiFzGtr cxeHzkhGXQoCxU5AhaaQSmRRlkVzBKQNMKMZMLt1rP5hxjc3bJl5RQjcj5U0qeLf4L hmgt1iqonV9icIVNsziKeQZQh+Yx+VYXMYnXXmAS3qaghMT2mpX9p7qms69k3MFwBp 6ZsXM/0/KXnvg== To: Ali Sherief From: alicexbt Reply-To: alicexbt Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Feedback-ID: 40602938:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 08 Aug 2022 13:19:40 +0000 Cc: "bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] P2P trading replacement transactions X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Aug 2022 13:12:58 -0000 Hi Ali, > It would probably only work out if each output got their own private keys= , since otherwise Alice can't share any outputs with Bob and vice versa. > The whole thing sounds like an HTLC with an additional trading of private= keys for the actual trades instead of in the HLTC. How are they going to s= hare their private keys securely, with PGP? Alice and Bob can share outputs and these are swapped in the replacement tr= ansactions. A 2of3 multisig and Carol is required so that nobody cheats. Tr= ading of private keys is not required. I have explained things in a differe= nt way in my [last email][1] sent to Michael Folkson. [1]: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2022-August/02= 0841.html /dev/fd0 Sent with Proton Mail secure email. ------- Original Message ------- On Saturday, August 6th, 2022 at 7:46 PM, Ali Sherief = wrote: > It would probably only work out if each output got their own private keys= , since otherwise Alice can't share any outputs with Bob and vice versa. > > The whole thing sounds like an HTLC with an additional trading of private= keys for the actual trades instead of in the HLTC. How are they going to s= hare their private keys securely, with PGP? > Perhaps Taproot with its selective revealing of certain script branches c= an help here, but I'm not sure about details. > - Ali > > > > Hi Bitcoin Developers, > > > > Does it make sense to trade replacement transactions for privacy? I hav= e shared basic details to implement this and would love to read opinions ab= out it or ways to improve it: > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > alice > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > tx1: input a (0.01) -> output b1 (0.008) > > -> change c1 (0.001) > > > > tx2: input a (0.01) -> output e2 (0.007) > > -> output f2 (0.001) > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > bob > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > tx1: input d (0.011) -> output e1 (0.007) > > -> change f1 (0.003) > > > > tx2: input d (0.011) -> output b2 (0.008) > > -> output c2 (0.001) > > > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > carol > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D > > > > - creates an API to manage trades that will use 2 of 3 multisig > > - alice and bob create orders for replacement > > - either they could be matched automatically using some algorithm or bo= b manually accepts the offer > > - 2 of 3 multisig is created with Alice, Bob and Carol keys > > - bob locks 0.01 BTC in it and shares outputs e2,f2 with alice > > - alice signs tx2 and shares tx with bob > > - alice locks 0.011 BTC in it and shares outputs b2,c2 with bob > > - bob signs tx2 and shares with alice > > - both replacement txs can be broadcasted > > - funds are released from 2 of 3 multisig with a tx having 3 outputs (o= ne to pay fee which goes to carol) > > > > positives: > > > > - privacy > > > > negatives: > > > > - extra fees > > - will take some time although everything will be managed by wallet wit= h API provided by carol > > - need to lock bitcoin with same amount as used in tx1 > > - amounts could still be used to link txs in some cases- carol and othe= r peer knows the details > > >