📅 Original date posted:2017-02-14
📝 Original message:>> - If you use one of the todays available SPV clients, you will reveal
>> your complete wallet content („~all your addresses") to every network
>> observer between you and the node you have connected to. This means, if
>> you pay for a coffee (while being on the owners WIFI), the coffee owner
>> and all the involved ISPs can correlate your wallet with your other
>> internet behavior. Same is true for your cellphone provider if you use
>> cellular.
> What about allowing trusted users connecting on a different connection. Much
> like the RPC one.
> Make that one encrypted. Different usecase, different connection.
>
- What protocol would you use? The same p2p protocol but different port
and/or different process? Why?
- If not the p2p protocol, how would you form a standard? Would it be
worth doing a standard?
- Could you fall back to the current SPV model against random untrusted
peers if you additional channel is not available?
- What are the downsides using current p2p network?
- Would this also solve the security problem of creating designated
channels between peers (the "addnode" thing is based on IPs)?
</jonas>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170214/1e198586/attachment-0001.sig>;
Jonas Schnelli [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nf…3dtxs
2023-06-07 17:56:23
in reply to nevent1q…qkvz
Author Public Key
npub1nfrrurat393mqymf3s26pujyn5vujlem3pzcukr5p9d4qpklngxq43dtxsPublished at
2023-06-07 17:56:23Event JSON
{
"id": "aefed6741dd6c23b443dba2477854f8f1de4217cee0d754c9b8a845c79bba497",
"pubkey": "9a463e0fab8963b013698c15a0f2449d19c97f3b88458e5874095b5006df9a0c",
"created_at": 1686160583,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"1b51795ee3de0471069901761d0f6325d2b5fe8bd15e565deee4918af435f74c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ebc819921fb0c57319712b0d07ddb039869ab75178916ebff66603a470d42a56",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"dcb947d818dbfd7cf0baf26c0d5eb606b5a32336c5483fb53e05146315833ca7"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-02-14\n📝 Original message:\u003e\u003e - If you use one of the todays available SPV clients, you will reveal\n\u003e\u003e your complete wallet content („~all your addresses\") to every network\n\u003e\u003e observer between you and the node you have connected to. This means, if\n\u003e\u003e you pay for a coffee (while being on the owners WIFI), the coffee owner\n\u003e\u003e and all the involved ISPs can correlate your wallet with your other\n\u003e\u003e internet behavior. Same is true for your cellphone provider if you use\n\u003e\u003e cellular.\n\u003e What about allowing trusted users connecting on a different connection. Much \n\u003e like the RPC one.\n\u003e Make that one encrypted. Different usecase, different connection.\n\u003e\n- What protocol would you use? The same p2p protocol but different port\nand/or different process? Why?\n- If not the p2p protocol, how would you form a standard? Would it be\nworth doing a standard?\n- Could you fall back to the current SPV model against random untrusted\npeers if you additional channel is not available?\n- What are the downsides using current p2p network?\n- Would this also solve the security problem of creating designated\nchannels between peers (the \"addnode\" thing is based on IPs)?\n\n\u003c/jonas\u003e\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 833 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170214/1e198586/attachment-0001.sig\u003e",
"sig": "1a099e8063fc09df76de763903c8729ade66c327fab9cf53058a4436d8fd28693c969ebda0001f7ab3634eeff6d1eaae1f263321fc10ad04447dafeea3621a90"
}