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
|
Return-Path: <keatonatron@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F06D73645
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 30 Jan 2019 02:06:58 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wr1-f49.google.com (mail-wr1-f49.google.com
[209.85.221.49])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5BE0085A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 30 Jan 2019 02:06:58 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wr1-f49.google.com with SMTP id t6so24267727wrr.12
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 29 Jan 2019 18:06:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to
:cc; bh=h5PqYcP3iB7aRCazTXTWhHRRJgracT35aNRjUQnV0FA=;
b=dVTXBBCTi2xj6eo0x0Z9dHVGvH6yVBLXoYevrR306WJdiZKSSdx6GoPFqUW26NxbJs
PNRg5uwq2xYf2kqzOxe52ioyQWVNGbHSlQWx6Ysg/t2KtDe2AH3rOfRKjZJMkb7hZaWq
Za5jKgGsbHA856oBR+2MWTIp79Z5FQVVR3ro7w59yV39Ikm8xBmrXwXZSmH8IiY6zUbi
iAPFvYIwh6O8Ed0MHz/5DVJh7mb8xrWPBfENfChxaKWTLHQpaFgOfHwGbac97OsCwkWM
BMD+WKm5ccNTu7Em1xhkYwC0kMzBH2pbQJGO/AJXtxXp96oSDRZzSotsFN5V84G0Cl4R
1wQQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc;
bh=h5PqYcP3iB7aRCazTXTWhHRRJgracT35aNRjUQnV0FA=;
b=uhrNV4lFTC2S7b2z8XjZ2aLiBfJQz1zpiREy6q3oWWt9DDbd5OK2Efyl9is0IPWqQL
iurv0kABHYow3c0vZn7kcNFc/TZDz8XoUkuu0If+rhDFZeRzM16YfNHSVEaKUVHL4IJb
gbok55wTyGOvE0ddRdVdAz/9xHs3YAgggZUKGlzwarpRrkYe/Azn2qDUziYwMI1anvIo
VcmELfdXvc89K1ZxPGIdvimIxNtAZ4g1G9hSW4X55bt5BfHE8YGeOZumNUIGv5cjBcnv
kKF44ZUmIOaVFaczLfEr/Io2CI6pbndx3VGIOKuvbsO+xpKJ76kjcL5+/vbXiPHt1iAE
TSrA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukffFaffz3wVTMVlAzxyrr036wf41h/gX9OcOnRYTsbit9WMdTeT
oGjeWk9+bBVWuGoyR6Xv6PTQkkdjTh0kTnsEYI0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN4aQom9PlbPl3tK/AgfbTJAGgqgT8EMXsy0J/6dEKsFCMjmcyGYDAW9S49H54kaWc7WjKd7yky4JURh3DSb0w8=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:4a8e:: with SMTP id o14mr26918934wrq.159.1548814016672;
Tue, 29 Jan 2019 18:06:56 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <TtjH2zicjKr8PBVCMOvA7ryt2z_XXvtrpC4y1wuWSxexNwMdbPGE7vPmu6UnzmfYqYBMxZ8NNoz4VUnODdIcjR4j-E1sYz_FA6ZZMjKHtuM=@protonmail.com>
<e15c5dd7-6fe1-b253-e129-aeae6493acd1@gmail.com>
<-yZhdFkKfKAEz1_4GKKSpTxjvR8EDSsH_5-TTh_4X5qwa79igXKR14rh6JASrald-F97o1htWY_kcBQ7IVr7ZH9zOQlOEwzhkWDjTq0d7F4=@protonmail.com>
<2cd4fe6d-c0ca-5ae7-4107-38e1609743a8@gmail.com>
<CAH+Axy7SJhTskrTX_i+Nc+HMtcNXhOFuGi11X=EjFEfBW=H06A@mail.gmail.com>
<MN5bgFMThBJ_6HiuX-aC9lAp7ainm0vhzOFMYefU-Z2QI26RUE7EmW0xTgvnxArriD-lQUTaB_wBZyKga1po6hquh1fVH5N_5wuLVIEIBfQ=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <MN5bgFMThBJ_6HiuX-aC9lAp7ainm0vhzOFMYefU-Z2QI26RUE7EmW0xTgvnxArriD-lQUTaB_wBZyKga1po6hquh1fVH5N_5wuLVIEIBfQ=@protonmail.com>
From: James MacWhyte <keatonatron@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 18:06:30 -0800
Message-ID: <CAH+Axy68O76GjjKtdzwOQBS0bQauoPXJEYnrztSfYzVNDSbcNw@mail.gmail.com>
To: rhavar@protonmail.com
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000497b460580a35d77"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 08:25:43 +0000
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] bustapay BIP :: a practical sender/receiver
coinjoin protocol
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: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 02:06:59 -0000
--000000000000497b460580a35d77
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
James
On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 2:11 PM <rhavar@protonmail.com> wrote:
>
> It isn't passed "back and forth so many times".
>
You are right, I got the wrong impression the first time I read it.
> This is an important anti-DoS/anti-spy tactic, as it proves the sender
> actually owns those inputs and if the protocol is not followed to
> completion, the transaction can be dumped on the network.
>
I'm not convinced this is a valid concern, at least not valid enough to add
extra complications to the process. The sender could still refuse to sign
the final transaction after they see the recipient's in-/outputs; "show me
yours and I'll show you mine" isn't much of a spy deterrent, and nothing
here prevents a DOS attack.
As an implementor, I would suggest keeping the protocol as simple as
possible. By dropping the signing in the first step, the recipient doesn't
need to maintain the ability to lookup and verify unspent outputs. It also
would enforce the increased privacy, which the sender obviously wants if
they are going down this path (in other words, either have the process
complete or fail -- don't give the recipient the ability to broadcast the
not-private transaction against the wishes of the sender).
--000000000000497b460580a35d77
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><br clear=3D"all"><div><div dir=3D"ltr" c=
lass=3D"gmail_signature" data-smartmail=3D"gmail_signature">James</div></di=
v><br></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_=
attr">On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 2:11 PM <<a href=3D"mailto:rhavar@protonma=
il.com">rhavar@protonmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"=
gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(20=
4,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><br></div><div>It isn't passed "=
back and forth so many times".</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Y=
ou are right, I got the wrong impression the first time I read it.</div><di=
v>=C2=A0</div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0px=
0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div>This i=
s an important anti-DoS/anti-spy tactic, as it proves the sender actually o=
wns those inputs and if the protocol is not followed to completion, the tra=
nsaction can be dumped on the network.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div=
><div>I'm not convinced this is a valid concern, at least not valid eno=
ugh to add extra complications to the process. The sender could still refus=
e to sign the final transaction after they see the recipient's in-/outp=
uts; "show me yours and I'll show you mine" isn't much of=
a spy deterrent, and nothing here prevents a DOS attack.</div><div><br></d=
iv><div>As an implementor, I would suggest keeping the protocol as simple a=
s possible. By dropping the signing in the first step, the recipient doesn&=
#39;t need to maintain the ability to lookup and verify unspent outputs. It=
also would enforce the increased privacy, which the sender obviously wants=
if they are going down this path (in other words, either have the process =
complete or fail -- don't give the recipient the ability to broadcast t=
he not-private transaction against the wishes of the sender).</div></div></=
div>
--000000000000497b460580a35d77--
|
