From ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com  Thu Feb  6 02:38:30 2020
From: ZmnSCPxj at protonmail.com (ZmnSCPxj)
Date: Thu, 06 Feb 2020 02:38:30 +0000
Subject: [Lightning-dev] Decoy node_ids and short_channel_ids
In-Reply-To: <875zglbz5g.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
References: <CACdvm3PU3SDmKZdBmOryaWwedJnmT8dsReb8CDKx3ZdnFpiwaA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACdvm3O63hHdUMMixoCGrjzU17LoU0wj6DNzOw0CqwujGtJAqg@mail.gmail.com>
 <RpICrwvZzFA04mN0znex3ZOjUU_EjEmffKCLfasmksjS-SHB9Wa-2a6d8dDCkpvQZ4dXkMvSBMned8Q4g0AAIgF4yvKaELkj4qmfot9-q3U=@protonmail.com>
 <CACdvm3NWdAMVS+LFBWQpN32yiE=wCt=eRUadSransu-jYFijHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <87o8ufatgw.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <87d0avasbu.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
 <CACdvm3O_BNUhaOfwvyz7eK9N1FHLFMQmB31odSvtvxvAZL6eVQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CACdvm3P1M-odSqHB_kSgDJAioaop8k_49oGiTZUafokppUTjuQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <875zglbz5g.fsf@rustcorp.com.au>
Message-ID: <i0SWBTbJJgbYw9nRgMWN49U4Emf1lJF2s9mr2GQPPhUI-EdUve7owVU9nVYfDSYcUYzy2334a6lu4S0_C05FzWyy_yvWfH0O7--ULnSrBN4=@protonmail.com>

Good morning Rusty,


> No, Bob can include the scid he used in the update_add_htlc message, so
> Alice can check.
>
> I'm extremely nervous about custodial lightning services restricting
> what they will pay to. This is not theoretical: they will come under
> immense KYC pressure in the near future, which means they cannot pay
> arbitrary invoices.
>
> Thus my preference for a system which doesn't add any requirements on
> the payer.

This adds requirements on Bob, so the KYC pressure could transfer to them instead.
This might be acceptable though, if the payer and Bob are on separate jurisdictions (i.e. Risk-Sharing), but then if the payer is on a custodial service as well, the custodial service can be pressured to inspect the routing hints of any invoice it is told to pay.

Which I suppose is the entire point of t-bast email.

Regards,
ZmnSCPxj