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
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
|
Return-Path: <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9CEEC88A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 28 Jun 2016 19:55:40 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-vk0-f42.google.com (mail-vk0-f42.google.com
[209.85.213.42])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38BC8249
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 28 Jun 2016 19:55:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vk0-f42.google.com with SMTP id j2so37175176vkg.2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 28 Jun 2016 12:55:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
:subject:to; bh=oXJam+/7RxVy4umZ/++ZX9QuX8zhCMRx43dhFt8mrbE=;
b=DkHijeICgX3jzPCG1mu3sAA1yyKXpwtfOBVV13Dr+mGibGumPWJIOQabcTgmAQPIm5
cCFZpvpuogZMYJBYKXGamhQ2MGWK5BVyGFrU2g0wkzbM0jW5zHnteMZu/iJGjohEkM4r
NU/GD+LFAZ/sn17hyOZSvKFdTLrp/FJg3PBSXuEjN7Q0sjk3iMdzb6FsX+Uub2iGDwev
j8vYHUnCJLItQf36q7KZlSGd2YCDf/jBiNirGDSk3HA8PNmaBKUnB+0/OD7Pdj+rLOqV
ihaRqMA1ihFPXd6Z9w8A5ZhdfdJqURxXhXk7GTT8t2Mhx4xzY90InZi+1Vj8nOdGJ85o
775g==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=oXJam+/7RxVy4umZ/++ZX9QuX8zhCMRx43dhFt8mrbE=;
b=H4bFZptTeAg41qudFG+v605uWbDEYcwAXdtRBK8QN5I+pZY9mFE7hpayOAJL1MuPOX
IVXOV0BQek9BeS9+TgNrRuijEeWmT0nEpVgFlCPMNZK34B+c2K3WWldTSR0BKSPASELX
5oEfXFKXnxJio2zUrgd8PxI13R9R0bAjqMNYW06C16vVFEHwVi5Tufz1VggSjPtS5fUh
P7NtFCJPVVJHzi0N+W9xdf6EAQQEMnVNN4uJv2adK6GIowPEtEFwX+y8VefubDElvLj7
Jm3SjEmDZgnsYEv3AiQWpeYEKafabzgVaztt8sOqXP/jwR/cFwoeJFMic2YC1aKxzzjr
ty+A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tITQ2d1CJESdF5slxNnRowDO+oV39ULDL4NQnQoD4oxCKUkQP8bZ88JxKeh5+vbe3SHeusoDieZKvyrKQ==
X-Received: by 10.31.210.133 with SMTP id j127mr1634282vkg.143.1467143739290;
Tue, 28 Jun 2016 12:55:39 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: gmaxwell@gmail.com
Received: by 10.103.94.67 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2016 12:55:37 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <577234A4.3030808@jonasschnelli.ch>
References: <87h9cecad5.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
<1E86A00F-0609-4DBC-9543-94AE04CC13C9@voskuil.org>
<577234A4.3030808@jonasschnelli.ch>
From: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 19:55:37 +0000
X-Google-Sender-Auth: WL92ODOcvfJHqNO175L_vRINa-4
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgQFqHBdbym4GMAV-mdcEWR1SdGc3av0mDu65keKP9Ak6g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli.ch>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 151
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: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 19:55:40 -0000
> I understand the use, when coupled with a yet-to-be-devised identity system, with Bloom filter features. Yet these features
This is a bit of a strawman, you've selected a single narrow usecase
which isn't proposed by the BIP and then argue it is worthless. I
agree that example doesn't have much value (and I believe that
eventually the BIP37 bloom filters should be removed from the
protocol).
Without something like BIP151 network participants cannot have privacy
for the transactions they originate within the protocol against
network observers. Even if, through some extraordinary effort, their
own first hop is encrypted, unencrypted later hops would rapidly
expose significant information about transaction origins in the
network.
Without something like BIP151 authenticated links are not possible, so
manually curated links (addnode/connect) cannot be counted on to
provide protection against partitioning sybils.
Along the way BIP151 appears that it will actually make the protocol faster.
> Given that the BIP relies on identity
This is untrue. The proposal is an ephemerally keyed opportunistic
encryption system. The privacy against a network observer does not
depend on authentication, much less "identity". And when used with
authentication at all it makes interception strongly detectable after
the fact.
> The BIP does not [...] contemplate the significant problems associated with key distribution in any identity system
Because it does not propose any "identity system" or authorization
(also, I object to your apparent characterization of authentication as
as an 'identity system'-- do you also call Bitcoin addresses an
identity system?).
That said, manually maintaining adds nodes to your own and somewhat
trusted nodes is a recommend best practice for miners and other high
value systems which is rendered much less effective due to a lack of
authentication, there is no significant key distribution problem in
that case, and I expect the future auth BIP (Jonas had one before, but
it was put aside for now to first focus on the link layer encryption)
to address that case quite well.
|
