Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 06:56:32 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Justin Newton <justin@netki.com>
Message-ID: <20160623105632.GB19241@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <CAJowKg+zYtUnHv+ea--srehVa5K46sjpWbHVcVGRY5x0w5XRTQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<20160621221347.GC10196@fedora-21-dvm>
	<CABqynxJCiXL0djx+xt9i=HJqC=0=5sZ9ecL7k1_a_XHiJ8qibw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8P1HSweYDcXXzwPJ"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABqynxJCiXL0djx+xt9i=HJqC=0=5sZ9ecL7k1_a_XHiJ8qibw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Even more proposed BIP extensions to BIP 0070
Precedence: list


--8P1HSweYDcXXzwPJ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 05:14:31PM -0700, Justin Newton wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev <
> Hi Peter,
>    Certainly AML/KYC compliance is one of the use cases that BIP 75 and o=
ur
> certificates can support.  As a quick summary,
>=20
> There are individuals and entities that would like to buy, sell, and use
> bitcoin, and other public blockchains, but that have compliance
> requirements that they need to meet before they can do so.  Similarly,
> companies and entrepreneurs in the space suffer under the potential threat
> of fines, or in extreme cases, jail time, also for not meeting AML or
> sanctions list compliance.  We wanted to build tools that allowed
> entrepreneurs to breathe easy, while at the same time allow more people a=
nd
> companies to enter the ecosystem.  We also believe that the solution we a=
re
> using has the characteristics that you want in such a solution, for examp=
le:
>=20
> 1> Only the counterparties (and possibly their service providers in the
> case of hosted services) in a transaction can see the identity data,
> protecting user privacy.
>=20
> 2> The counterparties themselves (and possibly their service providers in
> the case of hosted services) decide whether identity information is
> required for any given transaction.
>=20
> 3> No trace is left on the blockchain or anywhere else (other than with t=
he
> counterparties) that identity information was even exchanged, protecting
> fungibility
>=20
> 4> The solution is based on open source and open standards, allowing open
> permissionless innovation, versus parties building closed networks based =
on
> closed standards.  The very fact that this solution went through the BIP
> process and was adapted based on feedback is an example of how this is
> better for users than the inevitable closed solution that would arise if
> the open source, community vetted version didn=E2=80=99t already exist.
>=20
> I don=E2=80=99t know if you are opposed to organizations that have AML re=
quirements
> from using the bitcoin blockchain, but if you aren=E2=80=99t, why wouldn=
=E2=80=99t you
> prefer an open source, open standards based solution to exclusionary,
> proprietary ones?

In some (most?) countries, it is illegal to offer telecoms services without
wiretap facilities. Does that mean Tor builds into its software "open sourc=
e"
"open standards" wiretapping functionality? No. And interestingly, people
trying to add support for that stuff is actually a thing that keeps happeni=
ng
in the Tor community...

In any case, I'd strongly argue that we remove BIP75 from the bips reposito=
ry,
and boycott wallets that implement it. It's bad strategy for Bitcoin develo=
pers
to willingly participate in AML/KYC, just the same way as it's bad for Tor =
to
add wiretapping functionality, and W3C to support DRM tech. The minor tacti=
cal
wins you'll get our of this aren't worth it.

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

--8P1HSweYDcXXzwPJ
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature

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

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJXa8BdAAoJEGOZARBE6K+yvo4H/05eb599DjPEuI8XHMoQkWFO
97jeVUmb2z1VNAb99nM2uff/Wu3759b9jhtVAEz6PfztPQZGVq+sZNf+m7+XlNL7
BqFK+psWGXbNinsXfuYoYHc62P92vePb0l7X1uHaS8A4vlm6igCDm+rYiUCovCq5
vt+c2GrPfjgi1h9MYHEhApP3kzWegTejEW1Ud9y0iF+B/z9HGEyR/foCEybAhGH8
ckveWW9DgSeN25SsCG2uEUFyySv7KAk+NQpA82f/k7gt64rusCzWAZzQa5KwMlFM
20JYMu6jw0TpIgla8Sn/hfHeHm8zhzb8IODh2rOHSzHCCkb5ORms9pz2kLE+HXk=
=JNhK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--8P1HSweYDcXXzwPJ--