📅 Original date posted:2017-04-01
📝 Original message:On 2017-02-17 11:28, Chris Belcher via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I think this committed bloom filter idea is very good and much better
> than bip37, but for good privacy for when bitcoin is used often still
> requires certain behavior namely downloading blocks
> from many different peers with new tor circuits.
>
> Note that I've been dealing with counting transaction subgraphs but
> actually finding them from blocks might also be computationally
> infeasible. Although a Bayesian approach worked very
> well for similar transaction subgraph linking
> [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.06747v3.pdf]
>
> It would also be interesting to analyze what information a spy can get
> if they are missing some blocks that the wallet downloaded.
>
> For the long term, private and high-volume bitcoin use will be best
> served by off-chain transactions. They will probably be a huge win just
> because the large and public blockchain is such a non-private
> way of doing things.
>
Thank you for the analysis, this generally matches my views about the
properties offered by the system.
I've generally developed the opinion that BIP37 is effectively unused
by all but a very small number of wallets and services now, setting up
sinkhole nodes in the network to monitor `filterload` commands seems
to back that up.
bfd at cock.lu [ARCHIVE] /
npub1md…gy6y7
2023-06-07 17:58:57
in reply to nevent1q…kdk6
Author Public Key
npub1mdmqmt0prpddcexkljfzd40uf7nvrc56c7gsg2spn3lgcjghguxqwgy6y7Published at
2023-06-07 17:58:57Event JSON
{
"id": "f9dbf05b22ad2d5297fd2f03f9704856945b40885aae5d26cacffa6b6fe3d73e",
"pubkey": "db760dade1185adc64d6fc9226d5fc4fa6c1e29ac791042a019c7e8c4917470c",
"created_at": 1686160737,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1fc9ff99222a88b158a1f8f9b878b51c0e831fc5ed061613391a0bd7717359e3",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-04-01\n📝 Original message:On 2017-02-17 11:28, Chris Belcher via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e I think this committed bloom filter idea is very good and much better\n\u003e than bip37, but for good privacy for when bitcoin is used often still\n\u003e requires certain behavior namely downloading blocks\n\u003e from many different peers with new tor circuits.\n\u003e \n\u003e Note that I've been dealing with counting transaction subgraphs but\n\u003e actually finding them from blocks might also be computationally\n\u003e infeasible. Although a Bayesian approach worked very\n\u003e well for similar transaction subgraph linking\n\u003e [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1612.06747v3.pdf]\n\u003e \n\u003e It would also be interesting to analyze what information a spy can get\n\u003e if they are missing some blocks that the wallet downloaded.\n\u003e \n\u003e For the long term, private and high-volume bitcoin use will be best\n\u003e served by off-chain transactions. They will probably be a huge win just\n\u003e because the large and public blockchain is such a non-private\n\u003e way of doing things.\n\u003e \n\nThank you for the analysis, this generally matches my views about the\nproperties offered by the system.\n\nI've generally developed the opinion that BIP37 is effectively unused\nby all but a very small number of wallets and services now, setting up\nsinkhole nodes in the network to monitor `filterload` commands seems\nto back that up.",
"sig": "4bf4d5de5574155099cc1f07ec2d5bb4afe82e53264846ea0687713299fb0ca0c76e4b7a16087ae91e40715afd05500b7fcf98f3b0366175a7a2a6121a308a24"
}