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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1RcviU-0006QU-Qs
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:10:34 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.160.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.160.47; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
helo=mail-pw0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-pw0-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1RcviP-0003fO-E4
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:10:34 +0000
Received: by pbcc11 with SMTP id c11so4573812pbc.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 20 Dec 2011 01:10:23 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.72.198 with SMTP id f6mr2557366pbv.6.1324372223548; Tue, 20
Dec 2011 01:10:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.142.195.21 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Dec 2011 01:10:23 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4EEFAFFB.10508@parhelic.com>
References: <CABr1YTebhitO4g-SarZ7H=aoG9a8zW1wd0rfR32o8i0vODbLJw@mail.gmail.com>
<82659F61-0449-47BB-88DC-497E0D02F8A1@ceptacle.com>
<CALxbBHUXEJLRDZ=RS1vuvkm7rDjFUPir0sU__f6TJXiTTQxWzA@mail.gmail.com>
<4EEE58CA.5090902@justmoon.de> <4EEFAFFB.10508@parhelic.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 10:10:23 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJAcLa9o9H7GfEGeer0+HQE7g7_5EA=Fiii94hxeJiTqkw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Jordan Mack <jordanmack@parhelic.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d041b4aa4ef5cb004b4826f25
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(laanwj[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1RcviP-0003fO-E4
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Protocol extensions
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 09:10:34 -0000
--f46d041b4aa4ef5cb004b4826f25
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Jordan Mack <jordanmack@parhelic.com>wrote:
> On 12/18/2011 1:19 PM, Stefan Thomas wrote:
> > Let those who want anonymity connect through Tor, Freenet, etc. It's
> > easy to add anonymity via an extra layer, but it is impossible to add
> > performance on top of a slow system.
>
> That's a very good point. This is needless complication at the protocol
> level. Alternatives, like Tor, could be used to provide the desired
>
Agreed. Please don't roll your own onion network. It is very non-trivial to
get security and anonymity to an acceptable level. Securing cryptocurrency
itself is a big enough challenge already.
Another reason it is better to use Tor is because of the mixing effect. A
bitcoin-specific onion network would be subject to easy traffic analysis if
it only carries Bitcoin messages.
effect. Developers could even choose to integrate Tor functionality into
> the client itself at some point.
>
Yes, good idea. I've thought about making a "bitcoin tor bundle", analogous
to the firefox Tor bundle that is available from the Tor site itself.
Probably would need to package the block chain with it, as downloading that
over Tor takes ages and causes unnecessary load on the network...
Wladimir
--f46d041b4aa4ef5cb004b4826f25
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 10:43 PM, Jordan=
Mack <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:jordanmack@parhelic.com">jord=
anmack@parhelic.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"=
>
<div class=3D"im">On 12/18/2011 1:19 PM, Stefan Thomas wrote:<br>
=C2=A0> Let those who want anonymity connect through Tor, Freenet, etc. =
It's<br>
=C2=A0> easy to add anonymity via an extra layer, but it is impossible t=
o add<br>
=C2=A0> performance on top of a slow system.<br>
<br>
</div>That's a very good point. This is needless complication at the pr=
otocol<br>
level. Alternatives, like Tor, could be used to provide the desired<br></bl=
ockquote><div><br>Agreed. Please don't roll your own onion network. It =
is very non-trivial to get security and anonymity to an acceptable level. S=
ecuring cryptocurrency itself is a big enough challenge already.<br>
<br>Another reason it is better to use Tor is because of the mixing effect.=
A bitcoin-specific onion network would be subject to easy traffic analysis=
if it only carries Bitcoin messages.<br><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quo=
te" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"=
>
effect. Developers could even choose to integrate Tor functionality into<br=
>
the client itself at some point.<br></blockquote><br>Yes, good idea. I'=
ve thought about making a "bitcoin tor bundle", analogous to the =
firefox Tor bundle that is available from the Tor site itself. <br><br>
Probably would need to package the block chain with it, as downloading that=
over Tor takes ages and causes unnecessary load on the network... <br><br>=
Wladimir<br></div></div>
--f46d041b4aa4ef5cb004b4826f25--
|
