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
115
116
117
118
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D7C91027
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 12 Mar 2018 04:14:52 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail4.protonmail.ch (mail4.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.27])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EED5F8B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 12 Mar 2018 04:14:50 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 00:14:42 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=default; t=1520828088;
bh=lsPppiIuC6UwAJNKsYPH68AcZ8n5vkccOre7LBK/pA8=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID:
From;
b=Jk9oR8vG7mcO9umqI+yG8l+8K9yxz8WL/UGYHeg/oux0HItNjfY89JpBUDE6lJvN5
hkpvYlYWLiGPk4SHBCCZqL1+ZWwtZ2Yy5S6YfVS1nPkk4KNCPVJwEXBKup6Je6QTq+
hhnpZRTVLm8IWS1InvgPPCzGk3mjigLytWW5q1KQ=
To: =?UTF-8?Q?JOSE_FEMENIAS_CA=C3=91UELO?= <jose.femenias@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <Us9RkES7hdpIyleB-Di6Cb3p-ydB293c8hKvumN3uJI9v_5b33YIMkSK6zGSgtWm4bclRklNeCAIcqBk-9MK7TFUjWbyZsNGgftfVW4KPHY=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <90096274-9576-4A08-A86A-E1C4F3E3B5DE@gmail.com>
References: <90096274-9576-4A08-A86A-E1C4F3E3B5DE@gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: el4j0RWPRERue64lIQeq9Y2FP-mdB86tFqjmrJyEPR9VAtMovPEo9tvgA0CrTsSHJeeyPXqnoAu6DN-R04uJUg==:Ext:ProtonMail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL,
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
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 13:11:24 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bulletproof CT as basis for election voting?
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: Mon, 12 Mar 2018 04:14:52 -0000
Good morning Jose,
By my understanding, the sender needs to reveal some secrets to the receive=
r, and the receiver will then know if it received 0 or 1 coin from that sen=
der. (At least from my understanding of MimbleWimble; it might not be the =
case for CT, but MW is an extension of CT so...)
If voters send vote-coins directly to The Party, then The Party knows the v=
otes of particular voters, and may then dispatch subcontractors to dispatch=
those voters. It may be possible to have aggregators/mixers, but then you=
would have to trust the aggregators/mixers operate correctly and send to t=
he correct destination party, and that the mixers are not recording voters.
Maybe in combination with something like CoinSwap or CoinJoin protocol woul=
d work to obscure the source of coins: a voter would have to swap several t=
imes with many, many other voters to ensure increased anonymity set (and th=
en maybe some voters may report their transactions to The Party).
In any case sending directly from the tx of the Voting Authority to another=
tx to your selected The Party would let The Party members who secretly con=
trol the Voting Authority records to figure out, which voters got which txo=
uts of the Voting Authority (presumably the Voting Authority has strict pub=
lic records of which txout went to which voter, in order to prevent the Vot=
ing Authority secretly giving multiple vote-coins to a single One Man, All =
Votes).
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
=E2=80=8BSent with ProtonMail Secure Email.=E2=80=8B
=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me=
ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90
On March 11, 2018 8:44 PM, JOSE FEMENIAS CA=C3=91UELO via bitcoin-dev <bitc=
oin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> If I understand Bulletproof Confidential Transactions properly, their mai=
n virtue is being able to hide not the senders/receivers of a coin but the =
amount transferred.
>=20
> That sounds to me like a perfect use case for an election.
>=20
> For instance, in my country, every citizen is issued a National ID Card w=
ith a digital certificate.
>=20
> So, a naive implementation could simply be that the Voting Authority, sen=
ds a coin (1 coin =3D 1 vote) to each citizen above 18. This would be an op=
en transaction, so it is easily auditable.
>=20
> Later on, each voter sends her coin to her preferred party, as part of a =
Bulletproof CT, along with 0 coins to other parties to disguise her vote.
>=20
> In the end, each party will accrue as may votes as coins received.
>=20
> Is there any gotcha I=E2=80=99m missing here? Are there any missing featu=
res required in Bulletproof to support this use case?
>=20
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
>=20
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
>=20
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
|
