Subhra Mazumdar [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2020-01-27 📝 Original message: Hey thanks for clearing ...
📅 Original date posted:2020-01-27
📝 Original message:
Hey thanks for clearing the confusion. Well then may be we can look out for
such a provision in off chain payment systems for Monero.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 13:20 Ugam Kamat <ugamkamat1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Subhra – In order to have faith that the channel announced by the
> nodes is actually locked on the Bitcoin mainchain we need to have the
> outpoint (`txid` and `vout`) of the funding transaction. If we do not
> verify that the funding transaction has been confirmed, nodes can cheat us
> that a particular transaction is confirmed when it is not the case. As a
> result we require that nodes announce this information along with the
> public keys and the signatures of the public keys that was used to lock the
> funding transaction.
>
>
>
> This information is broadcasted in the `channel_announcement` message in
> the `short_channel_id` field which includes the block number, transaction
> number and vout. Since Bitcoin does not allow confidential transactions, we
> can query the blockchain and find out the channel capacity even when the
> amounts are never explicitly mentioned.
>
>
>
>
>
> Ugam
>
>
>
> *From:* Lightning-dev <lightning-dev-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Subhra Mazumdar
> *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2020 12:45 PM
> *To:* lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> *Subject:* [Lightning-dev] Not revealing the channel capacity during
> opening of channel in lightning network
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> What can be the potential problem if a channel is opened whereby
> the channel capacity is not revealed publicly but just a range proof of the
> attribute (capacity >0 and capacity < value) is provided ? Will it pose a
> problem during routing of transaction ? What are the pros and cons ?
>
> I think that revealing channel capacity make the channels susceptible to
> channel exhaustion attack or a particular node might be targeted for node
> isolation attack ?
>
>
> --
>
> Yours sincerely,
> Subhra Mazumdar.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20200127/0a7e9949/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:
Hey thanks for clearing the confusion. Well then may be we can look out for
such a provision in off chain payment systems for Monero.
On Mon, Jan 27, 2020, 13:20 Ugam Kamat <ugamkamat1 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Subhra – In order to have faith that the channel announced by the
> nodes is actually locked on the Bitcoin mainchain we need to have the
> outpoint (`txid` and `vout`) of the funding transaction. If we do not
> verify that the funding transaction has been confirmed, nodes can cheat us
> that a particular transaction is confirmed when it is not the case. As a
> result we require that nodes announce this information along with the
> public keys and the signatures of the public keys that was used to lock the
> funding transaction.
>
>
>
> This information is broadcasted in the `channel_announcement` message in
> the `short_channel_id` field which includes the block number, transaction
> number and vout. Since Bitcoin does not allow confidential transactions, we
> can query the blockchain and find out the channel capacity even when the
> amounts are never explicitly mentioned.
>
>
>
>
>
> Ugam
>
>
>
> *From:* Lightning-dev <lightning-dev-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org> *On
> Behalf Of *Subhra Mazumdar
> *Sent:* Monday, January 27, 2020 12:45 PM
> *To:* lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> *Subject:* [Lightning-dev] Not revealing the channel capacity during
> opening of channel in lightning network
>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> What can be the potential problem if a channel is opened whereby
> the channel capacity is not revealed publicly but just a range proof of the
> attribute (capacity >0 and capacity < value) is provided ? Will it pose a
> problem during routing of transaction ? What are the pros and cons ?
>
> I think that revealing channel capacity make the channels susceptible to
> channel exhaustion attack or a particular node might be targeted for node
> isolation attack ?
>
>
> --
>
> Yours sincerely,
> Subhra Mazumdar.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/attachments/20200127/0a7e9949/attachment.html>;