Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YZsMb-0000Zo-0J for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:45:13 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of riseup.net designates 198.252.153.129 as permitted sender) client-ip=198.252.153.129; envelope-from=odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net; helo=mx1.riseup.net; Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1YZsMX-0004GS-AR for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:45:12 +0000 Received: from plantcutter.riseup.net (plantcutter-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.121]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "*.riseup.net", Issuer "COMODO RSA Domain Validation Secure Server CA" (verified OK)) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4FB6441834 for ; Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:45:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (Authenticated sender: odinn.cyberguerrilla) with ESMTPSA id 00F14227F9 Message-ID: <550F7E28.2060708@riseup.net> Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:44:56 +0000 From: odinn MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net References: <55034205.4030607@localhost.local> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.6 at mx1 X-Virus-Status: Clean Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [198.252.153.129 listed in list.dnswl.org] -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid 0.0 T_DKIM_INVALID DKIM-Signature header exists but is not valid 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines X-Headers-End: 1YZsMX-0004GS-AR Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Criminal complaints against "network disruption as a service" startups X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 02:45:13 -0000 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 If you (e.g. Chainalysis) or anyone else are doing surveillance on the network and gathering information for later use, and whether or not the ultimate purpose is to divulge it to other parties for compliance purposes, you can bet that ultimately the tables will be turned on you, and you will be the one having your ass handed to you so to speak, before or after you are served, in legal parlance. Whether or not the outcome of that is meaningful and beneficial to any concerned parties and what is the upshot of it in the end depends on on what you do and just how far you decide to take your ill-advised enterprise. Chainalysis and similar operations would be, IMHO, well advised to cease operations. This doesn't mean they will, but guess what: Shot over the bow, folks. Jan M=F8ller: > What we were trying to achieve was determining the flow of funds > between countries by figuring out which country a transaction > originates from. To do that with a certain accuracy you need many > nodes. We chose a class C IP range as we knew that bitcoin core and > others only connect to one node in any class C IP range. We were > not aware that breadwallet didn't follow this practice. Breadwallet > risked getting tar-pitted, but that was not our intention and we > are sorry about that. >=20 > Our nodes DID respond with valid blocks and merkle-blocks and > allowed everyone connecting to track the blockchain. We did however > not relay transactions. The 'service' bit in the version message is > not meant for telling whether or how the node relays transactions, > it tells whether you can ask for block headers only or full > blocks. >=20 > Many implementations enforce non standard rules for handling > transactions; some nodes ignore transactions with address reuse, > some nodes happily forward double spends, and some nodes forward > neither blocks not transactions. We did blocks but not > transactions. >=20 > In hindsight we should have done two things: 1. relay transactions=20 > 2. advertise address from 'foreign' nodes >=20 > Both would have fixed the problems that breadwallet experienced. > My understanding is that breadwallet now has the same 'class C' > rule as bitcoind, which would also fix it. >=20 > Getting back on the topic of this thread and whether it is illegal, > your guess is as good as mine. I don't think it is illegal to log > incoming connections and make statistical analysis on it. That > would more or less incriminate anyone who runs a web-server and > looks into the access log. At lease one Bitcoin service has been > collecting IP addresses for years and given them to anyone visiting > their web-site (you know who) and I believe that this practise is > very wrong. We have no intention of giving IP addresses away to > anyone, but we believe that you are free to make statistics on > connection logs when nodes connect to you. >=20 > On a side note: When you make many connections to the network you > see lots of strange nodes and suspicious patterns. You can be > certain that we were not the only ones connected to many nodes. >=20 > My takeaway from this: If nodes that do not relay transactions is a > problem then there is stuff to fix. >=20 > /Jan >=20 > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 10:48 PM, Mike Hearn > wrote: >=20 >> That would be rather new and tricky legal territory. >>=20 >> But even putting the legal issues to one side, there are >> definitional issues. >>=20 >> For instance if the Chainalysis nodes started following the >> protocol specs better and became just regular nodes that happen >> to keep logs, would that still be a violation? If so, what about >> blockchain.info? It'd be shooting ourselves in the foot to try >> and forbid block explorers given how useful they are. >>=20 >> If someone non-maliciously runs some nodes with debug logging >> turned on, and makes full system backups every night, and keeps >> those backups for years, are they in violation of whatever >> pseudo-law is involved? >>=20 >> I think it's a bit early to think about these things right now. >> Michael Gr=F8nager and Jan M=F8ller have been Bitcoin hackers for a >> long time. I'd be interested to know their thoughts on all of >> this. >>=20 >>=20 >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------- >> >>=20 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, >> sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot >> Media, is your hub for all things parallel software development, >> from weekly thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case >> studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the=20 >> conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/=20 >> _______________________________________________=20 >> Bitcoin-development mailing list=20 >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net=20 >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >>=20 >>=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- > >=20 Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored > by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your > hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly > thought leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials > and more. Take a look and join the conversation now. > http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ >=20 >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development > mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net=20 > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >=20 - --=20 http://abis.io ~ "a protocol concept to enable decentralization and expansion of a giving economy, and a new social good" https://keybase.io/odinn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJVD34mAAoJEGxwq/inSG8CvrQH/28Rt26oGdo9rS+PaR1fIQ1p Jwks11Axsmu5x3emTgIz0xUJ6zz/4ERM0LeNLBpfSFwZyLbuCgw1uiJplT+9uPgY hPXb9OTNejfWZJjYc3i6rNjf2SNc5E3/4PtgeOI6lI/SsGQ6ineNm6gFjwe8xVpt wCLOPetzCukQegXluFZZdALnPDf4H9yAeSsrfX2h2iCBAJ3qd9f1DP7+e6hvr+xr POVBjlRYtnSd/viKJ2IhMbRvnqd86pRNAKEWrjZp0CIkGyY7wh4nqtYErZi4TcOK H7yhU8o4/mgTNSIYdLTOSMlRi+nTMPWUD2jvO/Z9i9VTR9afn8E7j7iHD6QPMB0=3D =3DvdbG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----