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
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
|
Return-Path: <pete@petertodd.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D15F483
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:05:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from outmail148102.authsmtp.net (outmail148102.authsmtp.net
[62.13.148.102])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71621144
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:05:29 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-c247.authsmtp.com (mail-c247.authsmtp.com [62.13.128.247])
by punt20.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u8IG5RFB054432;
Sun, 18 Sep 2016 17:05:27 +0100 (BST)
Received: from petertodd.org (ec2-52-5-185-120.compute-1.amazonaws.com
[52.5.185.120]) (authenticated bits=0)
by mail.authsmtp.com (8.14.2/8.14.2/) with ESMTP id u8IG5PnI064503
(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO);
Sun, 18 Sep 2016 17:05:26 +0100 (BST)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by petertodd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73AB740120;
Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:01:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by localhost (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id A315920850; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 12:05:24 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 12:05:24 -0400
From: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
To: Jannes Faber <j.faber@elevate.nl>
Message-ID: <20160918160524.GA13307@fedora-21-dvm>
References: <20160918042001.GA9076@fedora-21-dvm>
<CABeL=0jSQsdyRFAUheQ9XSi1krM=PLFAARLXE8Du55FFkX8vZg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABeL=0jSQsdyRFAUheQ9XSi1krM=PLFAARLXE8Du55FFkX8vZg@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-Server-Quench: b6bcfc4f-7db9-11e6-bcde-0015176ca198
X-AuthReport-Spam: If SPAM / abuse - report it at:
http://www.authsmtp.com/abuse
X-AuthRoute: OCd2Yg0TA1ZNQRgX IjsJECJaVQIpKltL GxAVKBZePFsRUQkR
aAdMdwoUC1AEAgsB AmAbWlNeUFh7W2U7 bghPaBtcak9QXgdq
T0pMXVMcUQ0Rdhlh WGceVB13dwYIcH13 YQgwWCIIChd+I1t6
FhxdCGwHMGF9OjNL BV1YdwJRcQRMLU5E Y1gxNiYHcQ5VPz4z
GA41ejw8IwAXCSJJ TxsVN18OQEAEVjgA RhUPVTsoBwUZRyh7
NwE8MlkHEQ4WPCd6 G1o9UlUZNVobFhFT BF1ADGdFJlwMXDYi CBtBNQAA
X-Authentic-SMTP: 61633532353630.1038:706
X-AuthFastPath: 0 (Was 255)
X-AuthSMTP-Origin: 52.5.185.120/25
X-AuthVirus-Status: No virus detected - but ensure you scan with your own
anti-virus system.
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,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
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Interpreting nTime for the purpose of
Bitcoin-attested timestamps
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: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:05:30 -0000
--fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Sun, Sep 18, 2016 at 03:45:40PM +0200, Jannes Faber wrote:
> Would you not also have to consider (all) earlier blocks?
>=20
> T =3D max(block[i].nTime for i in {x-100, ..., x, ..., x + N-1}) + max_of=
fset
>=20
> In case one or more previous blocks have an nTime considerably in the
> future and blocks>=3D x have honest nTimes (or before true time).
>=20
> Maybe not strictly for the goal you were describing here (conservative
> estimate) but rather to prevent distinct timestamp events seeming to have
> happened in the wrong order?
Well that's the thing: timestamps are simply proofs that something existed
prior to some time, nothing more, nothing less.
So it doesn't make sense for there to be any notion of the "wrong order" in=
a
timestamp proof; the proof either is or is not valid, but that has nothing =
to
do with other proofs. Additionally, the architecture of OpenTimestamps does=
n't
and can't make any 100% guarantees about the apparent order of timestamps,
because it's always possible for an earlier timestamp to end up committed in
the blockchain after a later timestamp gets committed. It's not all that li=
kely
of an event, but it is possible.
If you don't want that to be possible, you're going to need a dedicated cha=
in
of transactions for your particular purpose, which adds a lot of complexity,
cost, and makes it much harder to achieve the same level of availability for
the service as a whole.
Remember that for many use-cases the user experience is that there's two or
more claimed dates, and OpenTimestamps simply verifies that those dates are
plausible. Take for example, timestamped git commits:
commit 536411e73b8c23dc2fdfd78052c893f578444926
ots: Got 2 attestation(s) from cache
ots: Success! Bitcoin attests data existed as of Thu Sep 15 01:07:08 20=
16 EDT
ots: Good timestamp
gpg: Signature made Thu 15 Sep 2016 12:10:25 AM EDT
gpg: using RSA key 6399011044E8AFB2
gpg: Good signature from "Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>"
gpg: aka "[jpeg image of size 5220]"
Author: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>
Date: Thu Sep 15 00:10:20 2016 -0400
Release v0.2.0
Here we have the date on the git commit, another date a few seconds later f=
or
the PGP signature, and a third date an hour later for the Bitcoin timestamp,
attesting to the fact that the two other dates for that one git commit are
plausible.
--=20
https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
--fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJX3rtBAAoJEGOZARBE6K+yH5UH/2aeDx8Rdm5ayeiLStwmPlOZ
KrL/0mWocusEiSZWyOrqSUPVsKXGsAbd+q0nja43SVNbsBmijwlyUHvS20RCHDVm
vlrH5D1ibE8pfwaUMzTsh02bWsaNDbU5l2BsuG29fJE8HanGwnvE5JYE4PT+9PHh
2uQfQcsvrtjnfNH9xBuAnK3S/9hTZU6ZZuP10h8o0ANSzcrAMvGBe0qUEQv/USok
/mWIzIoZEvshjC0zHWGUhk4sJn+R2kgf3BAbxjLOWPPO5vPko2qNBE9vGAFI92Ai
BBohfbOijUbmefing+KgahDOdnbWWFxRllv375HGrIdbryUEtaUHOJPIQ+mEpRM=
=3EF+
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--fdj2RfSjLxBAspz7--
|
