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
|
Return-Path: <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33F47C013E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:11:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1AC3C8550C
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:11:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id RYlcgq19qhGd
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:10:59 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail1.protonmail.ch (mail1.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.18])
by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41EB0854E7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:10:59 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:10:52 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=default; t=1582373456;
bh=C4ClZiaCW5Tn5XqHML20JLE0pYbpHnbCugEVfccv9wc=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Feedback-ID:
From;
b=adUWIcqe5kKULRUKLblzYxvhRDKz8zvYwNWH2+QqjTxVh6KUMGMPqW4uA/txd5Rba
tQW/7HE7FgORDBDlh12Dii5bCPLyCI5J8CoS+YMhViS/FSbNqAGj4KyE5XgioLQ+Xw
OCkolgDdhsjN1IFCkVaJVXiWlc/om+4PQTJOaRQo=
To: Antoine Riard <antoine.riard@gmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: AdamISZ <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: AdamISZ <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <L95umnyb-GwoyP_ZWM7oNmMbhooYpCFXoKAGRPoPOpGpMGhMHQWuczKhJ2VX2nrZt3jaJ5bOMy5dvQ3DYqs_O_eEsA_63dd2_rvdoOzoGoI=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALZpt+E4Mr=g8zw95tyteGh53DH1mZ2HhNzQdy92+ErTtx3VbQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CALZpt+E4Mr=g8zw95tyteGh53DH1mZ2HhNzQdy92+ErTtx3VbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Feedback-ID: bXDrzvuRufYtwlP51LbX1U1HVhop5RoBgHwub9Drp1-jSqeBk7WF1gtL3tVf_bUUZyA1LgUYiqtef7oP8A2trw==:Ext:ProtonMail
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 14:15:28 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] LN & Coinjoin, a Great Tx Format Wedding
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: Sat, 22 Feb 2020 12:11:01 -0000
=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90 Original Me=
ssage =E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90=E2=80=90
On Friday, 21 February 2020 22:17, Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-d=
ev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> How can a Bitcoin tranaction leak protocol usage ?
> * the output type (p2sh, p2wsh, ...)
> * the spending policy (2-of-3 multisig, timelock, hashlock,...)
> * outputs ordering (BIP69)
> * nLocktime/nSequence
> * RBF-signaling
> * Equal-value outputs
> * weird watermark (LN commitment tx obfuscated commitment number)
> * fees strategy like CPFP
> * in-protocol announcements [0]
>
Good list.
Another one, usually wouldn't be *protocol* as much as wallet leakage, but =
could be: utxo selection algorithm (which of course may be difficult to ded=
uce, but often, far from impossible).
(Also trivial and increasingly irrelevant, but nVersion).
With regards to coinjoin in this context (I know your points are much broad=
er), my comment is:
For existing protocols (joinmarket's, wasabi's, samourai's), in the equal-o=
uts paradigm, I don't see much that can be done in this area.
But I would ask people to consider CoinJoinXT[1] more seriously in a taproo=
t/schnorr world, since it addresses this exact point. With a short (not cro=
ss-block like swaps or LN setup) interaction, participants can arrange the =
effect of coinjoin without the on-chain watermark of coinjoin (so, steganog=
raphic). The taproot/schnorr part is needed there because multisig is requi=
red from transaction to transaction in that protocol, so doing it today is =
less interesting (albeit still interesting).
waxwing
[1] https://joinmarket.me/blog/blog/coinjoinxt/
|
