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
|
Return-Path: <burak@buraks.blog>
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF5EFC0029
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 7 Jun 2023 13:30:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D64941716
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 7 Jun 2023 13:30:12 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org 8D64941716
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.003
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.003 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, BITCOIN_XPRIO=1.004,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id WG_8tTDyP-x9
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 7 Jun 2023 13:30:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp2.osuosl.org C456140168
Received: from p3plwbeout26-03.prod.phx3.secureserver.net
(p3plsmtp26-03-2.prod.phx3.secureserver.net [216.69.139.28])
by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C456140168
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 7 Jun 2023 13:30:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-MW-NODE:
X-CMAE-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=fK78YbWe c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=64808662
a=dFffxkGDbYo3ckkjzRcKYg==:117 a=dFffxkGDbYo3ckkjzRcKYg==:17
a=DCCBpITDjAAA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=gIIAmfKQ5q4lVxeR2-wA:9
a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=kSdPIxx82tSIapk-2pzq:22
X-SECURESERVER-ACCT: burak@buraks.blog
X-SID: 6tEmqbnkjs4b2
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 16:30:07 +0300 (TRT)
From: Burak Keceli <burak@buraks.blog>
To: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt.org>
Message-ID: <345972294.3114897.1686144607871@eu1.myprofessionalmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <c78b9e621e994f3cf3500e4480b61b0e@dtrt.org>
References: <1300890009.1516890.1684742043892@eu1.myprofessionalmail.com>
<3c6c3b8b562bb56bbb855dc2b2b71f78@dtrt.org>
<558171558.1686821.1685102160441@eu1.myprofessionalmail.com>
<c78b9e621e994f3cf3500e4480b61b0e@dtrt.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Priority: 3
Importance: Normal
X-Mailer: Open-Xchange Mailer v8.12.73
X-Originating-IP: 216.9.110.1
X-Originating-Client: open-xchange-appsuite
X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4xfOcBYGn3Z4X7NNx1BNxcHCmFg8Teu7OevDLjpQaBOU/bWEoSlChSig5f8djOdlbzjtS0YBOSOnqRTGhRbzHGmUjbPGpgohQBGxu0tHHID3UQVA2RDW6t
xeaCNqdkUppAAhlL0sMXXh55VZyQ138PkzwLe4lgkPoqLEaSFwLlfO51aNbRziNg4rw2Zy/sJfZ5aLzI6HsMl0WMN8vGsRTsNlcKg2PGs0Q82AZTYyLMFVSc
2X44MWiNYcHXMyXS1Le74FoSAHWt74TUXCje8OJAwVw=
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 07 Jun 2023 20:54:38 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ark: An Alternative Privacy-preserving Second
Layer Solution
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: Wed, 07 Jun 2023 13:30:12 -0000
> A problem with the idea of using one-show signatures as double-spend
> protection is that miner-claimable fidelity bonds don't work as well
> against adversaries that are not just counterparties but also miners
> themselves.=20
Hey David,
The fidelity bonds in the Ark context are nothing but the vTXOs themselves,=
which in simple terms, have two possible closures: (1) a key-path collabor=
ative closure with higher precedence and (2) a script-path closure with low=
er precedence.
The key-path closure is a 2-of-2 between the rightful owner of the vTXO and=
the service provider. The script path closure, on the other hand, lets the=
service provider sweep funds after a relative lock time. The key-path clos=
ure has higher precedence over the script-path closure since it can be trig=
gered immediately with a satisfying signature.
If the service provider double-spends a transaction that enforces a one-tim=
e signature where Bob is the vendor, Bob can forge the service provider=E2=
=80=99s signature from the 2-of-2 and can immediately claim his previously-=
spent vTXO(s). If Alice (or the service provider) is a miner she won=E2=80=
=99t be able steal funds regardless, since she won=E2=80=99t be able co-sig=
n from the Bob=E2=80=99s key.
Best,
Burak
|
