📅 Original date posted:2014-08-19
📝 Original message:The concern is that if you can monitor traffic in and out of a single
node, you can determine which transactions originate from it vs those
which it relays. That's not great, certainly, but how many nodes
actually require that level of security, and surely they can use Tor or
VPN services if so?
Further, unless the remote nodes are in some way trusted, you're
changing the attack from read-only to requiring the ability to perform
a man in the middle attack - that doesn't seem much harder to me.
As Gregory states, there's been at least two recent serious if not
catastrophic OpenSSL bugs, and the consequences of Heartbleed if the
Bitcoin network had been vulnerable are the stuff of nightmares.
Very difficult to see the risk/reward payoff being worthwhile.
Ross
On 19/08/2014 18:35, Johnathan Corgan wrote:
> On 08/19/2014 09:38 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
>> We've dodged several emergency scale vulnerabilities by not having TLS.
> I'm still trying to understand the original premise that we want
> encrypted communications between nodes.
>
> I can certainly see the value of having *authenticated* traffic with
> specific nodes, using an HMAC for the protocol messages in place of the
> current checksum.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140820/19313167/attachment.html>;
J Ross Nicoll [ARCHIVE] /
npub1w9…saale
2023-06-07 15:25:20
in reply to nevent1q…qwll
Author Public Key
npub1w9f3dyp53vamf7dr4k43hh92z2cwqsxnmzluec3s8q7834sqmgcq9saaleSeen on
wss://relay.nostr.bandPublished at
2023-06-07 15:25:20Event JSON
{
"id": "95a8f67099a8350259c74e0ed0de8c48503d0ce8baa8a374904ccc86fac41817",
"pubkey": "71531690348b3bb4f9a3adab1bdcaa12b0e040d3d8bfcce230383c78d600da30",
"created_at": 1686151520,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"f7d80207f3f3e09247c97d3e8c17b8e8b9ffc855be5e4ac09f019815084b2528",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"1dce753f20875bd39f4fa1f20ab155862fee15543e40c91e1411e9784f032ef9",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"96b5dcd8eedfa403b3a94c15f3bab1cb084736a0f2f1301119d1819109ecc06d"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-08-19\n📝 Original message:The concern is that if you can monitor traffic in and out of a single\nnode, you can determine which transactions originate from it vs those\nwhich it relays. That's not great, certainly, but how many nodes\nactually require that level of security, and surely they can use Tor or\nVPN services if so?\n\nFurther, unless the remote nodes are in some way trusted, you're\nchanging the attack from read-only to requiring the ability to perform \na man in the middle attack - that doesn't seem much harder to me.\n\nAs Gregory states, there's been at least two recent serious if not\ncatastrophic OpenSSL bugs, and the consequences of Heartbleed if the\nBitcoin network had been vulnerable are the stuff of nightmares.\n\nVery difficult to see the risk/reward payoff being worthwhile.\n\nRoss\n\n\nOn 19/08/2014 18:35, Johnathan Corgan wrote:\n\u003e On 08/19/2014 09:38 AM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e We've dodged several emergency scale vulnerabilities by not having TLS.\n\u003e I'm still trying to understand the original premise that we want\n\u003e encrypted communications between nodes.\n\u003e\n\u003e I can certainly see the value of having *authenticated* traffic with\n\u003e specific nodes, using an HMAC for the protocol messages in place of the\n\u003e current checksum.\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e ------------------------------------------------------------------------------\n\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e Bitcoin-development mailing list\n\u003e Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net\n\u003e https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140820/19313167/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "d2ac24e90541bc58b0aa53d71ac82ae441db17d0c05c55e4c2c2a5cd708f68879bb892021ff766f676a8cd635f63079ecbae910649c9f2f96aa7bc023cc4a714"
}