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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <bip@mattwhitlock.name>) id 1YbWgw-0008S2-2b
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:01:02 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from resqmta-po-08v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.167])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YbWgu-0003Qz-QK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:01:02 +0000
Received: from resomta-po-01v.sys.comcast.net ([96.114.154.225])
by resqmta-po-08v.sys.comcast.net with comcast
id 8g0e1q0064s37d401g0vAt; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:00:55 +0000
Received: from crushinator.localnet
([IPv6:2601:6:4800:47f:1e4e:1f4d:332c:3bf6])
by resomta-po-01v.sys.comcast.net with comcast
id 8g0t1q0072JF60R01g0uTY; Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:00:54 +0000
From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:00:52 -0400
Message-ID: <2398237.7SAMuMnHkV@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.6 (Linux/3.18.7-gentoo; KDE/4.14.6; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <20150327155730.GB20754@amethyst.visucore.com>
References: <55034205.4030607@localhost.local> <2210650.iUsfZECcCc@crushinator>
<20150327155730.GB20754@amethyst.visucore.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [96.114.154.167 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1YbWgu-0003Qz-QK
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] "network disruption as a service" and
proof of local storage
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 16:01:02 -0000
On Friday, 27 March 2015, at 4:57 pm, Wladimir J. van der Laan wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 11:16:43AM -0400, Matt Whitlock wrote:
> > I agree that someone could do this, but why is that a problem? Isn't the goal of this exercise to ensure more full nodes on the network? In order to be able to answer the challenges, an entity would need to be running a full node somewhere. Thus, they have contributed at least one additional full node to the network. I could certainly see a case for a company to host hundreds of lightweight (e.g., EC2) servers all backed by a single copy of the block chain. Why force every single machine to have its own copy? All you really need to require is that each agency/participant have its own copy.
>
> They would not even have to run one. It could just pass the query to a random other node, and forward its result :)
D'oh. Of course. Thanks. :/
The suggestion about encrypting blocks with a key tied to IP address seems like a bad idea, though. Lots of nodes are on dynamic IP addresses. It wouldn't really be practical to re-encrypt the entire block chain every time a node's IP address changes.
|
