From: Aymeric Vitte <vitteaymeric@gmail•com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 12:01:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <06ccf31d-c895-4b7c-fc4b-89dad30f524e@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPg+sBg-ihLOi4eq6mCti=bGtbe0sWYv3ScmWoEZ8d=dHDQ5Mw@mail.gmail.com>
As stated in this thread and as I see it the use of BIP150 is optional,
so if some parties want to trust each others and use it, then they can,
if they don't like it and don't want to use it, then they don't use it
Unless I misread, some statements in this thread involving the Tor
network are wrong, the Tor network is a centralized network, each node
(except the bridges) have a long term identity key and have to prove
periodically to the authority servers that they are the owners of this
key, if not the other nodes will never extend circuits to them, then
they will be of course quite difficult to reach
Unfortunately the original proposal starting this thread seems to be
reinventing this system that probably can only lead to something
centralized which cannot apply for the bitcoin network (the Tor network
is centralized because the team want to control what is happening:
sybils, bugs, attacks, blacklist etc)
Unless some peers/nodes have decided to trust each others (BIP150) I
don't think it's a good idea at all that bitcoin nodes have anything
similar to long term nodeIDs (see
https://gist.github.com/Ayms/aab6f8e08fef0792ab3448f542a826bf , already
posted, not final, not finished, and the title does not really reflect
what would be the proposal today, but it carefully avoids any
possibility for a full node to have a long term ID)
Le 09/03/2017 à 02:55, Pieter Wuille via bitcoin-dev a écrit :
> On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 5:16 PM, Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil•org> wrote:
>> On 03/08/2017 03:12 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
>>> In that way, I see BIP150 as an extension of IP addresses, except more
>>> secure against network-level attackers. If you believe the concept of
>>> people establishing links along existing trust lines is a problem, you
>>> should be arguing against features in Bitcoin software that allows
>>> configuring preferred IP addresses to connect to as well (-addnode and
>>> -connect in Bitcoin Core, for example).
>> Weak identity is insufficient to produce the problem scenario that is at
>> the heart of my concern (excluding people). It is this "[same] except
>> more secure" distinction that is the problem. You brush past that as if
>> it did not exist.
> So you're saying that a -onlyacceptconnectionsfrom=IP option wouldn't
> be a concern to you because it can't exclude people? Of course it can
> exclude people - just not your ISP or a state-level attacker.
>
> Please, Eric. I think I understand your concern, but this argument
> isn't constructive either.
>
> The proposal here is to introduce visible node identities on the
> network. I think that's misguided as node count is irrelevant and
> trivial to fake anyway. But you bringing up BIP150 here isn't useful
> either. I know that you equate the concept of having verifiable
> identity keys in the P2P with a step towards making every node
> identifiable, but they are not the same. It's just a cryptographic
> tool to keep a certain class of attackers from bypassing restrictions
> that people can already make.
>
--
Peersm : http://www.peersm.com
node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor
GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-09 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-04 16:04 John Hardy
2017-03-05 6:29 ` Marcel Jamin
2017-03-05 12:55 ` John Hardy
2017-03-05 13:27 ` Btc Drak
2017-03-05 13:57 ` John Hardy
2017-03-07 18:44 ` Eric Voskuil
2017-03-08 2:01 ` bfd
2017-03-08 19:47 ` Jonas Schnelli
2017-03-08 21:09 ` Eric Voskuil
2017-03-08 21:20 ` Jonas Schnelli
2017-03-08 23:12 ` Pieter Wuille
[not found] ` <6a5a6a8f-d689-260a-76a9-a91f6bda56c5@voskuil.org>
2017-03-09 1:55 ` Pieter Wuille
2017-03-09 11:01 ` Aymeric Vitte [this message]
2017-03-09 1:08 ` Eric Voskuil
2017-03-08 21:25 ` [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers (and BIP150) Tom Zander
2017-03-08 21:31 ` Jonas Schnelli
[not found] <7c5020dd-5259-9954-7bf1-06fa98124f8f@voskuil.org>
2017-03-22 0:04 ` [bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers Eric Voskuil
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=06ccf31d-c895-4b7c-fc4b-89dad30f524e@gmail.com \
--to=vitteaymeric@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox