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
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8FEDC0051
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:14:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9247085F2F
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:14:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
Received: from fraxinus.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id pO0UUsKvaw0z
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:14:35 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-40141.protonmail.ch (mail-40141.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.141])
by fraxinus.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68C1185F19
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:14:35 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:14:29 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail; t=1600650872;
bh=PsFrAlXAcdRHMv4SE++TveZXYd8hhk26eta9hPH9dEg=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=iOkWlFFVF/eDRK2Uzcw+PobuSSMcagOeKKP1gKKftniVQbB22Q4LvQuqTi215MP8W
btK8KpykLxUTgAeBdEvJMjCt7KxC8Rj7ZT0ZnAJt+hH3u7enGkVKuQRe6U4hWUVlxd
xM6VjIMvQ2sPe1lNo6jqggSiWCL2XX3mQc80K+o0=
To: Tom Trevethan <tom@commerceblock.com>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <TC2UtcaDKCIkjtn41sIutqApciyqaGCD3SBSEWLBk4OT12siSkWIsp2LMmlmA0CLzUNuG1W8w-hB4Pq3ko1uGwbxpjxezFWKPq4C7OLUQo8=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAJvkSse5GDxzrDc0OeNSoHV90tsSvr-oCgY_P+p4O4T6PDUNpA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAJvkSseOx8mwYowLEnfKVEUuM5xsiYkbLdAvtaYxPpu4jY9pCg@mail.gmail.com>
<2Abk4Gqv5hJyGtA8Gg1WCP5RNuyUFkmRn1uUKp_mdUaXrRTz4SDBTPi0MGU7D5jj36VSzrqsIiO5lMR4gGRApRX2jyp8vXDeHBnFt-6ca-g=@protonmail.com>
<CAJvkSse5GDxzrDc0OeNSoHV90tsSvr-oCgY_P+p4O4T6PDUNpA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Statechain coinswap: assigning blame for failure
in a two-stage transfer protocol.
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: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 01:14:37 -0000
Good morning Tom,
> Hi ZmnSCPxj,
>
> Thanks for the reply.=C2=A0
>
> > Okay, I suppose this is much too high-level a view, and I have no idea =
what you mean by "statecoin" exactly.
>
> Sorry, most of the protocol details are in the links, but terminology sho=
uld be made clearer. A=C2=A0"statecoin" is a UTXO that is a 2-of-2 between =
the owner and SE (the tr*sted signing server) i.e. can be transferred off-c=
hain.=C2=A0
>
> Also, should have been clear that `addr1` is the 'statecoin=C2=A0address'=
which is different from the on-chain address (the shared public key the bi=
tcoin is paid to). The on-chain address does not change, whereas the=C2=
=A0'statecoin=C2=A0address' changes with each new owner and is used to auth=
enticate owners to the SE and act as proof of ownership on the=C2=A0statech=
ain - it is not related to the onchain address/pubkey and controlled by the=
owner only.=C2=A0
>
> > So it seems to me that this requires tr\*st that the coordinator is not=
going to collude with other participants.
>
> This is correct. The SE also must be trusted to not actively defraud user=
s. The main advantage of this scheme is that assuming the SE can be trusted=
, it is strictly non-custodial.=C2=A0
>
> > This is strictly worse than say Wasabi, where the coordinator colluding=
with other participants only allows the coordinator to break privacy, not =
outright steal funds.
> > It seems to me that the trust-minimized CoinSwap plan by belcher_ is su=
perior to this, with reduced scope for theft.
>
> This is true if the overriding aim is trust minimisation, but not if the =
aim is speed and cost while staying=C2=A0non-custodial. Off-chain SE transa=
ctions are near instant and orders of magnitude cheaper than on-chain. Prob=
ably best thought of as a non-custodial centralised mixer.=C2=A0
I think the entire point of non-custodiality ***is*** trust minimization.
The main objection against custodiality is that someone else can prevent yo=
u from spending the coin.
If I have to tr\*st the SE to not steal the funds, is it *really* non-custo=
dial, when after a swap, a corrupted SE can, in collusion with other partic=
ipants, take control of the coin and prevent me from spending it as I wish?
So I think touting "non-custodial" is relatively pointless if tr\*st is not=
minimized.
(I am aware there is an update mechanism, either Decker-Russell-Osuntokun o=
r Decker-Wattenhofer, that is anchored off he onchain transaction output, b=
ut anyone who can recover the raw keys for signing the funding transaction =
output --- such as a previous participant and a corrupt SE --- can very eas=
ily bypass the mechanism.)
For example, in my previous description of [implementing investment aggrega=
tion](https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2020-July/018=
055.html), while I admit you need tr\*st in the business owners who you are=
investing in, it does not require tr\*st in the aggregator, due to the n-o=
f-n, which cannot be reconstructed by the aggregator and all other particip=
ants without you.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
