Feedback-ID: i525146e8:Fastmail
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2022 11:22:21 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: "Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One Victim of Many" <gmkarl@gmail.com>,
 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <Yqinra8GvCcwnsM8@petertodd.org>
References: <CAD5xwhjR06Lp3ka-MqZQE64tfE5uDQB6TrMh06khjYrDzuT95g@mail.gmail.com>
 <YlMw5NxXnGV9WrVg@petertodd.org>
 <CAD5xwhj1kaJf+QCcf1MOtaAec-xTTr2M9LkJPCu2Ej0L9_3iPg@mail.gmail.com>
 <YlmGv6WbDeDqGJKX@petertodd.org>
 <CAD5xwhgGgq30C7GniNh1_DobPe+P4NTJySUkDiBZBj=OjzO5KA@mail.gmail.com>
 <YmqFRlDIkfbyVIZ2@petertodd.org>
 <CAD5xwhhB+8n+9pWiSCtx3DAPnSwV_7xHnXZ14mEj9H93eWUNEw@mail.gmail.com>
 <YqhtDoN784GG4Cx8@petertodd.org>
 <CALL-=e6ucj0RxM6=Lyrytb3MzQA2pOMwQqM_Gr9RDg3+5Lbudw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CALL-=e4=t7YMxDsBrDvR0Bkhagn+x2XnzZMYuoA4C=VXp=R2KA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
 protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="gzsI3QEt38UF9OFL"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CALL-=e4=t7YMxDsBrDvR0Bkhagn+x2XnzZMYuoA4C=VXp=R2KA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Why OpenTimestamps does not "linearize" its
 transactions
Precedence: list


--gzsI3QEt38UF9OFL
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 07:53:29AM -0400, Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One V=
ictim of Many via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I was privately asked for more opinions. I am sharing them publicly below:
>=20
> It's always been clear that OTS proves longness of duration but not
> shortness. It doesn't demonstrate that an earlier work was not
> published, because it hashes each document hash with private material
> the author must separately publicize. Any unpublished private material
> could be an earlier equivalent to a public proof.
>=20
> the reason i call this 'designed to be broken' is that it lets people
> rewrite history to their stories by republishing other people's
> documents under different contexts.

See "What Can and Can't Timestamps Prove?":

https://petertodd.org/2016/opentimestamps-announcement#what-can-and-cant-ti=
mestamps-prove

OpenTimestamps makes a trade-off: timestamps have significant limitations a=
s to
what they're able to prove. But in exchange, they have exceptionally good
scalability, making them essentially free to use. Timestamps are also much
easier to add on to existing processes and systems such as Git repositories.
Schemes that prove uniqueness require much more engineering and redesign wo=
rk
to actually accomplish anything.

--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

--gzsI3QEt38UF9OFL
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEFcyURjhyM68BBPYTJIFAPaXwkfsFAmKop6oACgkQJIFAPaXw
kfumYAf/d9yDw0yvLxeDU3tjt5qGGjYdFYqCHfdAM8Map1vwgtZbx9vW7wUuGKch
/EXgg0bDGSON4arna4s1tYkR9pQKJ0nN9OvEkt6vS7114tYOClJigUKaQPkUX4Z9
3D9IYDtk0/JdPYJPOK9M74gDtxvRcoGIlappxCw0BFOxXcD/vaeKjPqcSWNVY9RZ
JWgLqNWXKUu1joGZ1MrAe17u1Qte5UJ2SxdmdcBgLXFtYbV8JKDMn9RmT9mEyA5g
sxDxSeuZvw8Je2c2fGDH/MFRc5HH8P6hwapoWCI2KAeADSklzrQZy4bhtmkmNlds
sHqrbJIV47ANulrWPOMKHrmYq3yJ5A==
=ldkJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--gzsI3QEt38UF9OFL--