path: root/97/5dbfa2f10c4eef9f184d459c1928165d4408f1

Return-Path: <outlook_32F81FD1D1BD8CA0@outlook.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26034E58
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun,  5 Mar 2017 13:57:12 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from COL004-OMC3S9.hotmail.com (col004-omc3s9.hotmail.com
	[65.55.34.147])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DECBA127
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Sun,  5 Mar 2017 13:57:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from NAM04-SN1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com ([65.55.34.135])
	by COL004-OMC3S9.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with
	Microsoft SMTPSVC(7.5.7601.23008); Sun, 5 Mar 2017 05:57:10 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=outlook.com;
	s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; 
	bh=WhG0g7+8aCfFglxOUvbPjF8d0c0mbeZ10Zwz0V4uR5I=;
	b=Hx5+QRkyRhJCn8/9Erg7CVsDzYppNUqyPiwhQZgPum36sN2dLqLaFK0CE7nt5YLkNcXMjBhzRcUS/Oyf86hFgLrsOXYfJDzH3ZW25JuBPhK5ggys64FWKscfdjuQDp7RDNra2pVWlWh7+WB6BeuinJEDbiB+KIKcMVS3cfJcY1kAeh6fw1w33JfCzkw05M1qAuw5a4sqnO4Rda6HxiBNKfvOHp9l2PIiqtQUL77jWzh7TBa4BEHkXAeK7bh+jeHzr00bYYwyhN4BTx0StX+jj9Rg5rNQR6NCf0rjHDkMxDC3Hm/I2Gp1MI16cxsK+vAdFNUEg4yNlFtCgKoV1OYJog==
Received: from SN1NAM04FT036.eop-NAM04.prod.protection.outlook.com
	(10.152.88.57) by SN1NAM04HT171.eop-NAM04.prod.protection.outlook.com
	(10.152.88.229) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
	cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.1.933.11;
	Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:57:09 +0000
Received: from BL2PR03MB435.namprd03.prod.outlook.com (10.152.88.60) by
	SN1NAM04FT036.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.89.149) with
	Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2,
	cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id
	15.1.933.11 via Frontend Transport; Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:57:09 +0000
Received: from BL2PR03MB435.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.92.24]) by
	BL2PR03MB435.namprd03.prod.outlook.com ([10.141.92.24]) with mapi id
	15.01.0947.018; Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:57:09 +0000
From: John Hardy <john@seebitcoin.com>
To: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>, "bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org"
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers
Thread-Index: AQHSlQC2uBBD8WtSHEG5hC7gQs1fHKGGPl4AgAAHMJQ=
Sender: John Hardy <outlook_32F81FD1D1BD8CA0@outlook.com>
Date: Sun, 5 Mar 2017 13:57:08 +0000
Message-ID: <BL2PR03MB435029A0856DC7077D4AD68EE2D0@BL2PR03MB435.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <BL2PR03MB435C5077E69D91D0A8092B6EE2A0@BL2PR03MB435.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>,
	<CADJgMzvuii8Ww822v3DRa=-Azuqo4va6s32MsNSC-6M9=stm1Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADJgMzvuii8Ww822v3DRa=-Azuqo4va6s32MsNSC-6M9=stm1Q@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
authentication-results: gmail.com; dkim=none (message not signed)
	header.d=none; gmail.com;
	dmarc=none action=none header.from=seebitcoin.com; 
x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:6D07575D25BB3BFCDC49B1BDC805A0571232D5B2DF19B1DD6D1EEECCDCDBA23D;
	UpperCasedChecksum:047048BA838BC3B6E12D7EE4F85AF1ADE3E754EA5EF975F93018FFBE5EDCD1E5;
	SizeAsReceived:7968; Count:40
x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 2
x-tmn: [f2hgQcog9Mmxw5aYoQhnOPmmjhG0XmAP]
x-incomingheadercount: 40
x-eopattributedmessage: 0
x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; SN1NAM04HT171;
	5:8cG5jLY2GLgQiMU+B4C4B8/0K9Z8iSC18sFnFBP9+z021cEtE4sk3zM/ClIGf4gd02QNK4RwMYBW1JGT0cE6e2cpYlLYMC8e9ttLotrH1MgRdup5LiLqCyFuQfNa2AJq079MygwahBOfAz7ZwVY0OA==;
	24:7JtIDvrIAkbw3j5k7fTe3j+4He2TCPeWmCWafVdFrYUBzyEJRAAqvJYvEwiGDNcg11hLPz7KNRkNsKK1tC5xN0m+cTRMEZ2N54A/TQXRSp0=;
	7:qYkc9iHFyV8v+mYAHejB5uHHYgPEWxXOS89rHs+pGToj5QxQ3z/KzvdxIQj7afTLfVC783++q4j9Utll+6ahMfK6wAORSLe9dOzuIOOMcXGxZpMDa4wE0fC4VSFC7qlFvB83gahLK9zM70p5jp8qEkhdaK6CLjY2LAnfIgfJCnBXh8gM6Yer6V2xjU3oBrgFXkx+G7itF+B3MHXgvJ3+EmICaeLO/st7Ty2Xnkuei5p4AFx444RYicCVVOiwC0+cNkV6ADGsbbwFx17Tm0sUm9LmnjSktWas3cKepsP5/4PNqgepd+ZiLsMAlZdkA6Oa
x-forefront-antispam-report: EFV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; SFS:(10019020)(98900015);
	DIR:OUT; SFP:1102; SCL:1; SRVR:SN1NAM04HT171;
	H:BL2PR03MB435.namprd03.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; SPF:None;
	LANG:en; 
x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 59454b5e-bad5-42c8-19eb-08d463cf8417
x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0;
	RULEID:(22001)(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(1603101448)(1601125254)(1701031045);
	SRVR:SN1NAM04HT171; 
x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0;
	RULEID:(432015087)(444000031); SRVR:SN1NAM04HT171; BCL:0; PCL:0;
	RULEID:; SRVR:SN1NAM04HT171; 
x-forefront-prvs: 02379661A3
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="_000_BL2PR03MB435029A0856DC7077D4AD68EE2D0BL2PR03MB435namprd_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 05 Mar 2017 13:57:08.7975 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: SN1NAM04HT171
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Mar 2017 13:57:10.0383 (UTC)
	FILETIME=[625B2FF0:01D295B8]
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,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: Tue, 07 Mar 2017 14:08:07 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers
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: Sun, 05 Mar 2017 13:57:12 -0000

--_000_BL2PR03MB435029A0856DC7077D4AD68EE2D0BL2PR03MB435namprd_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

> Nodes are by design not supposed to be identifiable in any way

I feel you're conflating social identifiability with technical identifiabil=
ity. Sure, a node operator must always be able to remain anonymous, but nod=
es themselves require a certain level of identifiability otherwise there wo=
uld be no means to communicate between them.

I agree that absolute node counts have their limitations, but that doesn't =
stop them being used as a measure and even propaganda tool. If something li=
ke this is a way to help highlight the latter when it is occurring I think =
it has value. I 'm not convinced that node identifiers or identity persiste=
nce would have any meaningful impact on privacy, though am open to being co=
nvinced otherwise.


________________________________
From: Btc Drak <btcdrak@gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 5, 2017 1:27 PM
To: John Hardy; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers

Nodes are by design not supposed to be identifiable in any way, including p=
ersisting identities across IPs changes or when connecting over different n=
etworks (e.g. clearnet/tor). Anything that makes Bitcoin less private is a =
step backwards. Also absolute node count is pretty meaningless since only f=
ully validating nodes that participate in economic activity really matter.

As a side note, this should probably have started out as a bitcoin-discuss =
post.

On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 4:04 PM, John Hardy via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lis=
ts.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>> wrote=
:

The discussion of UASF got me thinking about whether such a method might le=
ad to sybil attacks, with new nodes created purely to inflate the node coun=
t for a particular implementation in an attempt at social engineering.


I had an idea for an anonymous, opt-in, unique node identification mechanis=
m to help counter this.


This would give every node the opportunity to create a node =91address=92/u=
nique identifier. This could even come in the form of a Bitcoin address.


The node on first installation generates and backs up a private key. The co=
rresponding public key becomes that node=92s unique identifier. If the node=
 switches to a new software version or a new IP, the identifier can remain =
constant if the node operator chooses.


Asking a node for its identifier can be done by sending a message the comma=
nd =91identify=92 and a challenge. The node can then respond with its uniqu=
e identifier and a signature for the challenge to prove it. The node can al=
so include what software it is running and sign this information so it can =
be verified as legitimate by third parties.


Why would we do this?


Well, it adds a small but very useful piece of data when compiling lists of=
 active nodes.


Any register of active nodes can have a record of when a node identifier wa=
s =93first seen=94, and how many IPs the same identifier has broadcast from=
. Also, crucially, we could see what software the node operator has been se=
en running historically.


This information would make it easy to identify patterns. For example if a =
huge new group of nodes appeared on the network with no history for their i=
dentifier they could likely be dismissed as sybil attacks. If a huge number=
 of nodes that had been reporting as Bitcoin Core for an extended period of=
 time started switching to a rival implementation, this would add credibili=
ty but not certainty (keys could be traded), that the shift was more organi=
c.


This would be trivial to implement, is (to me?) non-controversial, and woul=
d give a way for a node to link itself to a pseudo-anonymous identity, but =
with the freedom to opt-out at any time.


Keen to hear any thoughts?


Thanks,


John Hardy

john@seebitcoin.com<mailto:john@seebitcoin.com>

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundat=
ion.org>
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev



--_000_BL2PR03MB435029A0856DC7077D4AD68EE2D0BL2PR03MB435namprd_
Content-Type: text/html; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv=3D"Content-Type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3DWindows-1=
252">
<style type=3D"text/css" style=3D"display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margi=
n-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir=3D"ltr">
<div id=3D"divtagdefaultwrapper" style=3D"font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font=
-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;" dir=3D"ltr">
<p></p>
<div><span style=3D"font-family: Calibri, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; fon=
t-size: 16px;">&gt; Nodes are by design not supposed to be identifiable in =
any way</span><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I feel you're conflating social identifiability with technical identif=
iability. Sure, a node operator must always be able to remain anonymous, bu=
t nodes themselves require a certain level of identifiability otherwise the=
re would be no means to communicate
 between them.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I agree that absolute node counts have their limitations, but that doe=
sn't stop them being used as a measure and even propaganda tool. If somethi=
ng like this is a way to help highlight the latter when it is occurring I t=
hink it has value. I 'm not convinced
 that node identifiers or identity persistence would have any meaningful im=
pact on privacy, though am open to being convinced otherwise.</div>
<p></p>
<br>
<br>
<div style=3D"color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">
<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> Btc Drak &lt;btcdrak@=
gmail.com&gt;<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, March 5, 2017 1:27 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Hardy; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers</font>
<div>&nbsp;</div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir=3D"ltr">Nodes are by design not supposed to be identifiable in any=
 way, including persisting identities across IPs changes or when connecting=
 over different networks (e.g. clearnet/tor). Anything that makes Bitcoin l=
ess private is a step backwards. Also
 absolute node count is pretty meaningless since only fully validating node=
s that participate in economic activity really matter.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>As a side note, this should probably have started out as a bitcoin-dis=
cuss post.</div>
</div>
<div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Sat, Mar 4, 2017 at 4:04 PM, John Hardy via b=
itcoin-dev
<span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.o=
rg" target=3D"_blank">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>&gt;</span> =
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex; border-left:1=
px #ccc solid; padding-left:1ex">
<div dir=3D"ltr">
<div id=3D"m_9138875837303793420divtagdefaultwrapper" dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"=
font-size:12pt; color:#000000; font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-ser=
if">
<p><span id=3D"m_9138875837303793420docs-internal-guid-1be5245f-9a0e-19aa-b=
d44-cdeb0d05121c"></span></p>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">The discussion of UAS=
F got me thinking about whether such a
 method might lead to sybil attacks, with new nodes created purely to infla=
te the node count for a particular implementation in an attempt at social e=
ngineering.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">I had an idea for an =
anonymous, opt-in, unique node identification
 mechanism to help counter this.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">This would give every=
 node the opportunity to create a node
 =91address=92/unique identifier. This could even come in the form of a Bit=
coin address.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">The node on first ins=
tallation generates and backs up a private
 key. The corresponding public key becomes that node=92s unique identifier.=
 If the node switches to a new software version or a new IP, the identifier=
 can remain constant if the node operator chooses.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">Asking a node for its=
 identifier can be done by sending a message
 the command =91identify=92 and a challenge. The node can then respond with=
 its unique identifier and a signature for the challenge to prove it. The n=
ode can also include what software it is running and sign this information =
so it can be verified as legitimate
 by third parties.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">Why would we do this?=
</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">Well, it adds a small=
 but very useful piece of data when compiling
 lists of active nodes.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">Any register of activ=
e nodes can have a record of when a node
 identifier was =93first seen=94, and how many IPs the same identifier has =
broadcast from. Also, crucially, we could see what software the node operat=
or has been seen running historically.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">This information woul=
d make it easy to identify patterns. For
 example if a huge new group of nodes appeared on the network with no histo=
ry for their identifier they could likely be dismissed as sybil attacks. If=
 a huge number of nodes that had been reporting as Bitcoin Core for an exte=
nded period of time started switching
 to a rival implementation, this would add credibility but not certainty (k=
eys could be traded), that the shift was more organic.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">This would be trivial=
 to implement, is (to me?) non-controversial,
 and would give a way for a node to link itself to a pseudo-anonymous ident=
ity, but with the freedom to opt-out at any time.</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">Keen to hear any thou=
ghts?</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">Thanks,</span></p>
<br>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap">John Hardy</span></p>
<p dir=3D"ltr" style=3D"line-height:1.38; margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt=
"><span style=3D"font-size:11pt; font-family:Arial; background-color:transp=
arent; vertical-align:baseline; white-space:pre-wrap"><a href=3D"mailto:joh=
n@seebitcoin.com" target=3D"_blank">john@seebitcoin.com</a></span></p>
<p></p>
</div>
</div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.=
<wbr>linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.<wbr>org=
/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-<wbr>dev</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

--_000_BL2PR03MB435029A0856DC7077D4AD68EE2D0BL2PR03MB435namprd_--