summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/45/4ee19c97a4cde09ccf5a6851cfeed11aef05bd
blob: bd21048e5d0adea0fe016d02952f04385fc68bae (plain)
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
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
325
326
327
328
329
330
331
332
333
334
335
336
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
Return-Path: <tensiam@hotmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A045F14F8
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:28 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from EUR02-VE1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com
	(mail-oln040092069081.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.69.81])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DF70148
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:27 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hotmail.com;
	s=selector1;
	h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck;
	bh=YKaLXi72rWnCSYDWRlp9K/DBUGYw0nYXXn1oPU5qDGI=;
	b=C0iL1L1uWBdacoD0akYJ4OjjzgHPyF2G0Sw+mj4IdzxBxfoSIzSj6OM7zeEZqLEXyH7PSv/yyPnvqEd3Zul3Yf9/BkxOYjPDqX/YBaf7dN1KMKz5mv72cVLxEloAWhoZXRkTnoDcKmo7dV8BAfY6noBaBuUOh96mPXl72PeIutTwtn8d1fAeH/m2wCcehqrXbfRIbImyppas5d9Eiwkpn7N6ule37Tk6Q5p4mT+heY3ERqQimvSFl4hyr0tQPsh9pcE/KH7DQfmYeB960X3LFa7aurfu0kNWFBByDYwNcBdD+ecXF/LPVO1llPjE+Sc4Ynyod4xaTt6mjEhy+2zE6g==
Received: from VE1EUR02FT023.eop-EUR02.prod.protection.outlook.com
	(10.152.12.53) by VE1EUR02HT170.eop-EUR02.prod.protection.outlook.com
	(10.152.13.156) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
	cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id 15.20.1730.9;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:24 +0000
Received: from DB6PR10MB1832.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.152.12.60) by
	VE1EUR02FT023.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.12.132) with
	Microsoft SMTP
	Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384) id
	15.20.1730.9 via Frontend Transport; Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:24 +0000
Received: from DB6PR10MB1832.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
	([fe80::71be:5864:9139:4f9c]) by
	DB6PR10MB1832.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
	([fe80::71be:5864:9139:4f9c%3]) with mapi id 15.20.1709.015;
	Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:24 +0000
From: "Kenshiro []" <tensiam@hotmail.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	"rhavar@protonmail.com" <rhavar@protonmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] Payjoin privacy with the receiver of the
	transaction
Thread-Index: AQHU3Xi3TuLQzioN20KrtFTwOE2knaYWUg2AgAEejBg=
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:24 +0000
Message-ID: <DB6PR10MB1832829D9C812F50C66BD11CA6430@DB6PR10MB1832.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <DB6PR10MB1832253A8D022C4A91573D49A6470@DB6PR10MB1832.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>,
	<LUvvLGfixy2VQURUSkwxavfcxnQeLsUGvjm3o9iKW6EPOj0HIEeIlyhTUVIvaTcL_9NAY8k7CizkoKvSrQMq8b9fjDwxSzFvuAisboJ5jkQ=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <LUvvLGfixy2VQURUSkwxavfcxnQeLsUGvjm3o9iKW6EPOj0HIEeIlyhTUVIvaTcL_9NAY8k7CizkoKvSrQMq8b9fjDwxSzFvuAisboJ5jkQ=@protonmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US, es-ES
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:912DD739DE6C5FAC8879511975608A7A9C46210DE9E0E00C8EED2A0DA8798241;
	UpperCasedChecksum:E7347BCB50F1FBF5A3AF5260374558DE81F65CF255C95A4F8BDEA593063453AD;
	SizeAsReceived:7108; Count:43
x-tmn: [8wzKMors1tglFvDxEtUVrOgS3bRSaMOH]
x-ms-publictraffictype: Email
x-incomingheadercount: 43
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; PCL:0;
	RULEID:(2390118)(7020095)(20181119110)(201702061078)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031322404)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(1601125500)(1603101475)(1701031045);
	SRVR:VE1EUR02HT170; 
x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: VE1EUR02HT170:
x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: 0bi5Kbzj8g5JPuN3oIvVkIV7xX2c06cn+ivJNwhIc7M5oY6+pi2v4IJ9NBFwCQMF
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_000_DB6PR10MB1832829D9C812F50C66BD11CA6430DB6PR10MB1832EURP_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: hotmail.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-RMS-PersistedConsumerOrg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: eb9c521a-98b1-4458-50a0-08d6aeb06a65
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-rms-persistedconsumerorg: 00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 22 Mar 2019 10:23:24.1024 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: VE1EUR02HT170
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,FREEMAIL_REPLY,HTML_MESSAGE,
	RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 13:41:33 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Payjoin privacy with the receiver of the
 transaction
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: Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:23:28 -0000

--_000_DB6PR10MB1832829D9C812F50C66BD11CA6430DB6PR10MB1832EURP_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-2022-jp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

>I'm not really sure the problem you're describing, but it sounds like some=
thing that affects normal bitcoin transactions as well.

Yeah, it affects normal transactions too. But I'm focused in Payjoin becaus=
e it should allow private transactions. The problem I see is that Payjoin s=
houldn't allow that the sender or the receiver of the transaction can get i=
nformation about the bitcoin balance of each other. A person could have his=
 savings in btc in a single address, use Payjoin to send/receive a payment =
thinking it's private and leaking to the receptor he has a high amount of b=
tc. But an automatic splitting to itself in the background could solve the =
problem (maybe 100$ amounts) or so.

>There's certainly some interesting about the idea of "pre-fragmenting" you=
r wallet utxo so you can make (or in payjoin: receive) payments with better=
 privacy aspects.However, it's pretty unlikely to be practical for normal u=
sers, as it'll generally result in pretty big and cost-ineffective transact=
ions.

For users that really want privacy it should not be a problem. When a walle=
t receive a high amount of btc (+100$ or another amount defined by the user=
) it can automatically make a transaction to itself splitting the amount in=
 several addresses. The amounts that are already small don't need to be spl=
itted again. Small amount addresses + Payjoin could give real privacy to bi=
tcoin users. Users that don't want privacy could disable the "Private" mode=
 in the wallet and disable the auto-splitting feature.

i.e.: you receive 1000$ in btc and the wallet make an automatic transaction=
 to itself to 10 addresses, 100$ each.

I would prefer wait some time and have privacy than the opposite.

Regards

________________________________
From: rhavar@protonmail.com <rhavar@protonmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2019 17:52
To: Kenshiro \[\]; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Payjoin privacy with the receiver of the transac=
tion

I'm not really sure the problem you're describing, but it sounds like somet=
hing that affects normal bitcoin transactions as well.

There's certainly some interesting about the idea of "pre-fragmenting" your=
 wallet utxo so you can make (or in payjoin: receive) payments with better =
privacy aspects.However, it's pretty unlikely to be practical for normal us=
ers, as it'll generally result in pretty big and cost-ineffective transacti=
ons.

In general though, there's like a 1000 different things you can do with coi=
n selection, utxo management (and payjoin contributed input selection) but =
more often than not you are just making just making 1 trade off for another=
 and good solutions will be wildly different depending on how you use your =
wallet.


-Ryan


=1B$B!>!>!>!>!>!>!>=1B(B Original Message =1B$B!>!>!>!>!>!>!>=1B(B
On Monday, March 18, 2019 3:55 AM, Kenshiro \[\] via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-d=
ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

Hi,

I think Payjoin can be a very good privacy solution for Bitcoin, but I have=
 a question about it:

- If a user has 1 BTC in a single address and make a payjoin payment to oth=
er person of 0.1 BTC using that address as input, the other person can see =
in a blockchain explorer the change address with an amount of 0.9 BTC. That=
's a serious privacy leak. I would like to know what will be the standard s=
olution to this issue. An easy fix could be that the user wallet check if a=
ny address contains a BTC amount higher than a "safe" amount like 0.01 BTC =
or less. If some address exceed that amount the wallet could automatically =
make 1 payment to itself to split the amount in several addresses. In this =
way nobody receiving a payment from a user will ever know that he has a bit=
coin balance higher than the "safe" amount.

What do you think?

Regards,


--_000_DB6PR10MB1832829D9C812F50C66BD11CA6430DB6PR10MB1832EURP_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-2022-jp"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3Diso-2022-=
jp">
<style type=3D"text/css" style=3D"display:none;"> P {margin-top:0;margin-bo=
ttom:0;} </style>
</head>
<body dir=3D"ltr">
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style=3D"color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, &=
quot;Segoe UI Web (West European)&quot;, &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, -apple-syste=
m, BlinkMacSystemFont, Roboto, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-serif; back=
ground-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: inline !important">&gt;I'm not r=
eally
 sure the problem you're describing, but it sounds like something that affe=
cts normal bitcoin transactions as well.</span><br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Helvetica, sans-serif; font-size: 12pt;=
 color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<span style=3D"color: rgb(51, 51, 51); font-family: &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, &=
quot;Segoe UI Web (West European)&quot;, &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, -apple-syste=
m, BlinkMacSystemFont, Roboto, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-serif; back=
ground-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: inline !important"><br>
</span></div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">Yeah, it affects normal transactions too. B=
ut I'm focused in Payjoin because it should allow private transactions. The=
 problem I see is that Payjoin shouldn't allow that the sender or the recei=
ver of the transaction can get information
 about the bitcoin balance of each other. A person could have his savings i=
n btc in a single address, use Payjoin to send/receive a payment thinking i=
t's private and leaking to the receptor he has a high amount of btc. But an=
 automatic splitting to itself in
 the background could solve the problem (maybe 100$ amounts) or so.&nbsp;</=
div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"><span style=3D"font-family: &quot;Segoe UI&=
quot;, &quot;Segoe UI Web (West European)&quot;, &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, -app=
le-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, Roboto, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-ser=
if; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: inline !important">&gt;T=
here's
 certainly some interesting about the idea of &quot;pre-fragmenting&quot; y=
our wallet utxo so you can make (or in payjoin: receive) payments with bett=
er privacy aspects.However, it's pretty unlikely to be practical for normal=
 users, as it'll generally result in pretty
 big and cost-ineffective transactions.</span><br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"><span style=3D"font-family: &quot;Segoe UI&=
quot;, &quot;Segoe UI Web (West European)&quot;, &quot;Segoe UI&quot;, -app=
le-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, Roboto, &quot;Helvetica Neue&quot;, sans-ser=
if; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); display: inline !important"><br>
</span></div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">For users that really want privacy it shoul=
d not be a problem. When a wallet receive a high amount of btc (&#43;100$ o=
r another amount defined by the user) it can automatically make a transacti=
on to itself splitting the amount in several
 addresses. The amounts that are already small don't need to be splitted ag=
ain. Small amount addresses &#43; Payjoin could give real privacy to bitcoi=
n users. Users that don't want privacy could disable the &quot;Private&quot=
; mode in the wallet and disable the auto-splitting
 feature.&nbsp;</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">i.e.: you receive 1000$ in btc and the wall=
et make an automatic transaction to itself to 10 addresses, 100$ each.</div=
>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">I would prefer wait some time and have priv=
acy than the opposite.</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;"><br>
</div>
<div style=3D"font-size: 12pt;">Regards</div>
<div>
<div id=3D"appendonsend"></div>
<div style=3D"font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; col=
or:rgb(0,0,0)">
<br>
</div>
<hr tabindex=3D"-1" style=3D"display:inline-block; width:98%">
<div id=3D"divRplyFwdMsg" dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"Calibri, sans-serif" co=
lor=3D"#000000" style=3D"font-size:11pt"><b>From:</b> rhavar@protonmail.com=
 &lt;rhavar@protonmail.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, March 21, 2019 17:52<br>
<b>To:</b> Kenshiro \[\]; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [bitcoin-dev] Payjoin privacy with the receiver of the =
transaction</font>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>I'm not really sure the problem you're describing, but it sounds like =
something that affects normal bitcoin transactions as well.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>There's certainly some interesting about the idea of &quot;pre-fragmen=
ting&quot; your wallet utxo so you can make (or in payjoin: receive) paymen=
ts with better privacy aspects.However, it's pretty unlikely to be practica=
l for normal users, as it'll generally result
 in pretty big and cost-ineffective transactions.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In general though, there's like a 1000 different things you can do wit=
h coin selection, utxo management (and payjoin contributed input selection)=
 but more often than not you are just making just making 1 trade off for an=
other and good solutions will be
 wildly different depending on how you use your wallet.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div class=3D"x_protonmail_signature_block">
<div class=3D"x_protonmail_signature_block-user">
<div>-Ryan<br>
</div>
</div>
<div class=3D"x_protonmail_signature_block-proton x_protonmail_signature_bl=
ock-empty">
<br>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>=1B$B!>!>!>!>!>!>!>=1B(B Original Message =1B$B!>!>!>!>!>!>!>=1B(B<br>
</div>
<div>On Monday, March 18, 2019 3:55 AM, Kenshiro \[\] via bitcoin-dev &lt;b=
itcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org&gt; wrote:<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<blockquote class=3D"x_protonmail_quote" type=3D"cite">
<div style=3D"font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif; font-size:12pt; col=
or:rgb(0,0,0)">
<div><span>Hi,<br>
</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I think Payjoin can be a very good privacy solution for Bitcoin, but I=
 have a question about it:<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- If a user has 1 BTC in a single address and make a payjoin payment t=
o other person of 0.1 BTC using that address as input, the other person can=
 see in a blockchain explorer the change address with an amount of 0.9 BTC.=
 That's a serious privacy leak.
 I would like to know what will be the standard solution to this issue. An =
easy fix could be that the user wallet check if any address contains a BTC =
amount higher than a &quot;safe&quot; amount like 0.01 BTC or less. If some=
 address exceed that amount the wallet could
 automatically make 1 payment to itself to split the amount in several addr=
esses. In this way nobody receiving a payment from a user will ever know th=
at he has a bitcoin balance higher than the &quot;safe&quot; amount.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>What do you think?<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span>Regards,</span><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--_000_DB6PR10MB1832829D9C812F50C66BD11CA6430DB6PR10MB1832EURP_--