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
|
Return-Path: <jl2012@xbt.hk>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0A3A93C8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:07:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from s47.web-hosting.com (s47.web-hosting.com [199.188.200.16])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 176B31BE
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:07:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost ([::1]:34238 helo=server47.web-hosting.com)
by server47.web-hosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256)
(Exim 4.85) (envelope-from <jl2012@xbt.hk>)
id 1ZLA1q-001yWg-C1; Fri, 31 Jul 2015 09:07:14 -0400
Received: from 119.246.245.241 ([119.246.245.241]) by
server47.web-hosting.com (Horde Framework) with HTTP; Fri, 31 Jul 2015
13:07:14 +0000
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:07:14 +0000
Message-ID: <20150731130714.Horde.PvL1IB3Kf5S6GAA73N-HOw1@server47.web-hosting.com>
From: jl2012@xbt.hk
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
References: <20150731083943.Horde.68uT9J78H_PdIgIwQP5frA1@server47.web-hosting.com>
<CALqxMTFhfwvcqY0dSoq489kA9G8YkQZPkzJDEU1eQHsupq-31g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALqxMTFhfwvcqY0dSoq489kA9G8YkQZPkzJDEU1eQHsupq-31g@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Internet Messaging Program (IMP) H5 (6.1.4)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse,
please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - server47.web-hosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - xbt.hk
X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: server47.web-hosting.com: authenticated_id:
jl2012@xbt.hk
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-From-Rewrite: unmodified, already matched
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] A compromise between BIP101 and Pieter's proposal
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 13:07:18 -0000
Yes, data-center operators are bound to follow laws, including NSLs
and gag orders. How about your ISP? Is it bound to follow laws,
including NSLs and gag orders?
https://edri.org/irish_isp_introduces_blocking/
Do you think everyone should run a full node behind TOR? No way, your
repressive government could just block TOR:
http://www.technologyreview.com/view/427413/how-china-blocks-the-tor-anonymity-network/
Or they could raid your home and seize your Raspberry Pi if they
couldn't read your encrypted internet traffic. You will have a hard
time proving you are not using TOR for child porn or cocaine.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encryption_ban_proposal_in_the_United_Kingdom
If you are living in a country like this, running Bitcoin in an
offshore VPS could be much easier. Anyway, Bitcoin shouldn't be your
first thing to worry about. Revolution is probably your only choice.
Data-centers would get hacked. How about your Raspberry Pi?
Corrupt data-center employee is probably the only valid concern.
However, there is nothing (except cost) to stop you from establishing
multiple full nodes all over the world. If your Raspberry Pi at home
could no longer fully validate the chain, it could become a
header-only node to make sure your VPS full nodes are following the
correct chaintip. You may even buy hourly charged cloud hosting in
different countries to run header-only nodes at negligible cost.
There is no single point of failure in a decentralized network. Having
multiple nodes will also save you from Sybil attack and geopolitical
risks. Again, if all data-centres and governments in the world are
turning against Bitcoin, it is delusional to think we could fight
against them without using any real weapon.
By the way, I'm quite confident that my current full node at home are
capable of running at 8MB blocks.
Quoting Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>:
> I think trust the data-center logic obviously fails, and I was talking
> about this scenario in the post you are replying to. You are trusting the
> data-center operator period. If one could trust data-centers to run
> verified code, to not get hacked, filter traffic, respond to court orders
> without notifying you etc that would be great but that's unfortunately not
> what happens.
>
> Data-center operators are bound to follow laws, including NSLs and gag
> orders. They also get hacked, employ humans who can be corrupt,
> blackmailed, and themselves centralisation points for policy attack.
> Snowden related disclosures and keeping aware of security show this is very
> real.
>
> This isn't much about bitcoin even, its just security reality for hosting
> anything intended to be secure via decentralisation, or just hosting in
> general while at risk of political or policy attack.
>
> Adam
|
