Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.172 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.172; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f172.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <53F37635.5070807@riseup.net>
References: <CA+8=xuJ+YDTNjyDW7DvP8KPN_nrFWpE68HvLw6EokFa-B-QGKw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+8=xuKRyO1=bu7cgNGHvtAeqgKBxjTH2uUkb61GdCuEQWEu5A@mail.gmail.com>
	<0C0EF7F9-DBBA-4872-897D-63CFA3853726@ricmoo.com>
	<CA+8=xu+KWSF6XYgH-_t87na6M6UOD0CM1su8sizxn5a4b0_Xrw@mail.gmail.com>
	<33D4B2E3-DBF0-444E-B76A-765C4C17E964@ricmoo.com>
	<53F37635.5070807@riseup.net>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 09:38:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTF6424+FfzaL=+iaio2zu_uM_74yKohi7T3dtz=J9CjA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Justus Ranvier <justusranvier@riseup.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: Encrypt bitcoin messages
Precedence: list

On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:07 AM, Justus Ranvier
<justusranvier@riseup.net> wrote:
> If that's not acceptable, even using TLS with self-signed certificates
> would be an improvement.

TLS is a huge complex attack surface, any use of it requires an
additional dependency with a large amount of difficult to audit code.
TLS is trivially DOS attacked and every major/widely used TLS
implementation has had multiple memory disclosure or remote execution
vulnerabilities even in just the last several years.

We've dodged several emergency scale vulnerabilities by not having TLS.