1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
|
Return-Path: <enclade@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 452CAC000B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:39:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B47C4091D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:39:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 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,
RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id c8liAfqL9u45
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:39:19 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch (mail-40132.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.132])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D74F408FD
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:39:19 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:39:15 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail3; t=1644547156;
bh=z/NcNtsl/1o+x02PxrsmUdkG0MHT/TAgTaDKsincLh8=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
References:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID;
b=mfEF0hu6Ssu3OncjXeIBlM9Le3iIRCopwJ6pNTblo5HoUrm0YOfqh2VIIkw2nFAyb
nGrvYEzVodvxFDhS1aNusUpYCx5NYjcT2+09AdKO4odi3TsVncFleWzOXMmjzc58ws
RBRMobtYulMVJi/OWjr7pMTijlZNCLPtBLUjTooVV20Ehd68GTs/CU+Q26pAj85NDM
t7P8N8kZrtGz4arhEswtm2iIh57yYX+HMWWGRmo8hrvlqRu80aHCGYS1oN9KJxpLDs
M63VPeW3sHbTd56bQ+GWKBfTCFJ4eeM4+nbDPv762GUN3lLdfmmlm7tehLmpFMCAH2
mt71eZ3TPsvOg==
To: Devrandom <c1.bitcoin@niftybox.net>
From: enclade <enclade@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: enclade <enclade@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <eWWmEi8ofiungvQuh41R2FSA5vNK5HMUV4SeBkvSdocpP2Khh4p6BWq7WZuB3vYayj7V1ifgQvvrCIvCetm-RFjtlCQxtDRE1ZeafDPXoe8=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB0O3SWYXOr6mhytgkTFmO3i_p2=WAXg9RsRxYXU7w2eowWtnw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <tX3sVcTrVucOJoofiJ2ttaBdeUELAMvJ7nlSe1K9-CMk7Eu4IRD70rEhjpaxH8y7G5Dha2FXTnXaoSUCSkL2Z6V5wdeEAzmCMifppK3rbhg=@protonmail.com>
<CAB0O3SWYXOr6mhytgkTFmO3i_p2=WAXg9RsRxYXU7w2eowWtnw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 09:12:53 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Advancing the security of Neutrino using
minimally trusted oracles
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 02:39:20 -0000
That sounds completely reasonable.
Originally I had discussed privately making the protocol design completely =
interactive (client sends a nonce over DNS, oracle responds signing the non=
ce), but it was pointed out that making them use quantized timestamps mitig=
ated a lot of the issues regarding denial of service, and allows for fault =
proofs to be significantly stronger.
Delivering the oracle messages over a write only channel like Kryptoradio o=
r Blockstream Satellite would scale extremely well too. When the oracles pr=
oduce agreeing messages (hopefully, the majority of the time except on bloc=
k boundaries) the additional data is only 64 bytes per additional signer, s=
o it makes sense to broadcast any a client may want to trust.
------- Original Message -------
On Thursday, February 10th, 2022 at 4:07 PM, Devrandom <c1.bitcoin@niftybox=
.net> wrote:
> This would be very useful for the Validating Lightning Signer project, si=
nce we need to prove to a non-network connected signer that a UTXO has not =
been spent. It allows the signer to make sure the channel is still active.
>
> ( the related design doc is at https://gitlab.com/lightning-signer/docs/-=
/blob/master/oracle.md )
>
> I think it would be useful if the oracles were non-interactive, so that t=
hey can communicate with the world over a one-way connection. This would re=
duce their attack surface. Instead of signing over a client-provided timest=
amp, we could pre-quantize the timestamp and emit attestations for each qua=
ntum time step.
|
