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
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
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
|
