📅 Original date posted:2015-08-11
📝 Original message:Hi Benjamin,
On Sat, Aug 08, 2015 at 02:01:58PM +0200, Benjamin via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> How do you know who is who online?
If a node is not online, then the payment can be cancelled and
re-routed.
> If Alice and Bob want to transact and haven't exchanged keys before
> they need public-key infrastructure out-of-band to identify
> themselves. Which means they are using SSL and Certificate authorities
> and trust them.
Lightning doesn't solve the key exchange problem (perhaps something like
Namecoin will help in the future). Bitcoin faces this problem today. How
do you know the bitcoin address belongs to the recipient without
trusting CAs? What if, in the case of the majority of bitcoin payments
today, the bitcoin address was not signed and the recipient claimed to
have never received their funds? There should be signed proof of payment
in every transaction for this reason.
> If you have non-cooperative hubs they could flood the network and make
> it unusable. And why should hubs cooperate? There are no incentives in
> the system.
There are some incentives towards keeping the system functional via
fees. If you attempt to flood the system, you'll likely be paying some
fees -- someone running a node will not interpret it as an attack, as
they're getting some money (probabably substantially higher as they will
increase fees to ensure network availability).
I agree that it's very important to think through varius attack models.
--
Joseph Poon
Joseph Poon [ARCHIVE] /
npub1ej…p9cq8
2023-06-07 15:46:22
in reply to nevent1q…vug3
Author Public Key
npub1ej6vep7y2km5l6awukffelg8yeppkth2vjkjk9jypd5w336rxggs3p9cq8Published at
2023-06-07 15:46:22Event JSON
{
"id": "8a051b3bfc1e1a89623fe4ad88f73921867ee7639392724d0598c02e6a41608c",
"pubkey": "ccb4cc87c455b74febaee5929cfd0726421b2eea64ad2b16440b68e8c7433211",
"created_at": 1686152782,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"b963d5ab13b2acf43faead82c65a6f02c30bbf4ba0c154dbc3df5812a94073aa",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"df31b54016532befc7fc199a25429f36847d4eed08a3b6fd95c9ff3385c56921",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f5854a07c480aa95b00a3106a17778f7b58221d8dd12d11e6d9465ba737bd50c"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-11\n📝 Original message:Hi Benjamin,\n\nOn Sat, Aug 08, 2015 at 02:01:58PM +0200, Benjamin via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e How do you know who is who online? \n\nIf a node is not online, then the payment can be cancelled and\nre-routed.\n\n\u003e If Alice and Bob want to transact and haven't exchanged keys before\n\u003e they need public-key infrastructure out-of-band to identify\n\u003e themselves. Which means they are using SSL and Certificate authorities\n\u003e and trust them. \n\nLightning doesn't solve the key exchange problem (perhaps something like\nNamecoin will help in the future). Bitcoin faces this problem today. How\ndo you know the bitcoin address belongs to the recipient without\ntrusting CAs? What if, in the case of the majority of bitcoin payments\ntoday, the bitcoin address was not signed and the recipient claimed to\nhave never received their funds? There should be signed proof of payment\nin every transaction for this reason.\n\n\u003e If you have non-cooperative hubs they could flood the network and make\n\u003e it unusable. And why should hubs cooperate? There are no incentives in\n\u003e the system.\n\nThere are some incentives towards keeping the system functional via\nfees. If you attempt to flood the system, you'll likely be paying some\nfees -- someone running a node will not interpret it as an attack, as\nthey're getting some money (probabably substantially higher as they will\nincrease fees to ensure network availability).\n\nI agree that it's very important to think through varius attack models.\n\n-- \nJoseph Poon",
"sig": "c630bf74aa209a1a71161894f2625bba09daeb74605652d6ad5e1d0420629a0fbb1529395aed698d45627751290d4f8d49fb80bafd2c2fdc2832e87e67772a95"
}