path: root/77/59902ead410e1e6ab57b560995d5aae3c8274d

Return-Path: <alicexbt@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
 by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 654ABC002B
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:34:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 405B48148A
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:34:46 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 405B48148A
Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org;
 dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com header.i=@protonmail.com
 header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=protonmail3 header.b=PEY+/19D
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.102
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
 DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id a4BTX-HxOhYM
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:34:45 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org E703281469
Received: from mail-40132.protonmail.ch (mail-40132.protonmail.ch
 [185.70.40.132])
 by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E703281469
 for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
 Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:34:44 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 12:34:30 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
 s=protonmail3; t=1676291682; x=1676550882;
 bh=Qu1plM/YcWkrqNsKV/oka9yxGYJeJRg0rXIz9jse77g=;
 h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:
 Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:Message-ID:BIMI-Selector;
 b=PEY+/19D/aV5EEkBvvarNHxdaZfWRz4CIw8gBcqlJR+jzVm+poCAIWq16mfEJMjON
 zR05XDB3Awt30Pg5kxvx9KBQTk6mKRBpFf0hj5iwE+D5uqLUJDUUJP3yBUjcuZ7fkr
 4AHRHDG7O3cD0vMUXvAfg+gQhUkcCU8nR+UL5v/N7KnpCd/4YZkLVvsaHMaxrOUsX9
 /kSzYxtw0iqi9unS0jYVgx5bTgXoXJw1qV/mGCJJkbxEjlb4yfY6zEpJpAS9AWz0aC
 QcF2480h0Ua1vrsooI/yI6pgLe8ipkMDYAwV+SrC6nvhf9FDtXr7QMrWETIKkkPy0g
 OUPBkr/UumM9Q==
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: alicexbt <alicexbt@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <TG0yVn41L6VFOHFRYqd3iGz7mxHWtjFdaBrz8mlP6Uk8bmog_isDbtq_2QyvdUs9_Q-jStmx7V7l5rAesXDfHlK9Ehft7SkK5EWQ_3mg-eQ=@protonmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 40602938:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 13 Feb 2023 13:08:05 +0000
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Testing censorship resistance of bitcoin p2p network
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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, 13 Feb 2023 12:34:46 -0000

Hi Bitcoin Developers,

There is a famous quote attributed to Evelyn Beatrice Hall in her biography=
 of Voltaire: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death=
 your right to say it." I'm curious to know how many Bitcoin developers sha=
re this sentiment.

Recently there was a lot of enthusiasm on social media to run bitcoin core =
with a [patch][0] that would reject some transactions in mempool. Bitcoin K=
nots already has an option to reject transactions that reuse addresses. Wha=
t if such practices become common and some projects that provide easy to us=
e node software start censoring transactions? How would government agencies=
 take advantage of this whole drama?

I understand it is difficult to censor different type of transaction becaus=
e there will be some nodes relaying them and miners including in blocks. It=
 is still important to discuss this and different ways to test censorship r=
esistance.

- Peter Todd had written a [blog post][1] in which counting number of INVs =
(step 5,6,7 and 8) helps in testing if your transactions are getting relaye=
d by the connected peers.=20
- I had tried broadcasting transaction to specific nodes using [libbtc][2].=
 Based on my understanding it uses GETDATA to confirm your transaction was =
seen on other nodes after broadcasting.

What would an ideal tool for testing censorship resistance look like?

- Allows user to construct different types of transactions that might be co=
nsidered "bad" by some people. Example: OFAC address in output, Inscription=
, OP_RETURN, Address reuse etc.
- Option to broadcast transaction to specific nodes
- Verify if the transaction was relayed successfully or rejected
- Ban such peers using [setban][3] RPC as it would increase the probability=
 of tx getting propagated to miners

There was even some discussion about an [external mempool][4] that could be=
 used for non-standard transactions. It could also help in avoiding censors=
hip in some cases. I welcome your thoughts and feedback on this topic.

[0]: https://gist.github.com/luke-jr/4c022839584020444915c84bdd825831
[1]: https://petertodd.org/2022/bitcoin-core-nodes-running-fullrbf
[2]: https://twitter.com/1440000bytes/status/1574225052240777216
[3]: https://bitcoincore.org/en/doc/24.0.0/rpc/network/setban/
[4]: https://twitter.com/jamesob/status/1623827708168863747

/dev/fd0
floppy disc guy

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.