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
|
Return-Path: <tomz@freedommail.ch>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65EC19C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:08:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mx-out01.mykolab.com (mx.kolabnow.com [95.128.36.1])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5CDD522C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:08:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at kolabnow.com
X-Spam-Score: -2.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Received: from mx03.mykolab.com (mx03.mykolab.com [10.20.7.101])
by mx-out01.mykolab.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3394D615E7;
Thu, 16 Feb 2017 16:08:17 +0100 (CET)
From: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>
To: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 16:10:46 +0100
Message-ID: <1853296.U0XO7RE0lo@strawberry>
In-Reply-To: <302c0b13-1951-faec-7266-f42bf748163d@jonasschnelli.ch>
References: <c949a1a2-ca6c-1fa8-6712-0846c5519f66@jonasschnelli.ch>
<1850609.e9N5m2HcLf@strawberry>
<302c0b13-1951-faec-7266-f42bf748163d@jonasschnelli.ch>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:11:13 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP150/151 concerns and some comments
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: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 15:08:21 -0000
On Tuesday, 14 February 2017 22:01:51 CET Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev=20
wrote:
> >> - If you use one of the todays available SPV clients, you will reveal
> >> your complete wallet content (=E2=80=9E~all your addresses") to every =
network
> >> observer between you and the node you have connected to. This means, if
> >> you pay for a coffee (while being on the owners WIFI), the coffee owner
> >> and all the involved ISPs can correlate your wallet with your other
> >> internet behavior. Same is true for your cellphone provider if you use
> >> cellular.
> >=20
> > What about allowing trusted users connecting on a different connection.
> > Much like the RPC one.
> > Make that one encrypted. Different usecase, different connection.
>=20
> - What protocol would you use?
The RPC one. Which I think is JSON.
Your usecase is essentially just calling sendRawTransaction. Don=E2=80=99t=
=20
overcomplicate things.
=2D-=20
Tom Zander
Blog: https://zander.github.io
Vlog: https://vimeo.com/channels/tomscryptochannel
|
