📅 Original date posted:2017-06-02 📝 Original message:I agree with Greg and ...

Alex Akselrod [ARCHIVE] /

npub1ej2…yhjp

2023-06-07 18:02:06

in reply to nevent1q…0392

📅 Original date posted:2017-06-02
📝 Original message:I agree with Greg and Laolu; BIP-37 filtering for transactions is no better
than for blocks and completely destroys privacy.

A constant stream of transactions is OK, but even cheaper for light clients
would be Laolu's proposal of streaming more tx data than existing inv
messages but less than existing tx messages.

We could make a bit field of things to include in every inv-with-metadata
message, such as:
- witness data
- scriptSig data pushes
- scriptPubKey
- hash of scriptPubKey (unnecessary if full scriptPubKey is sent)
- scriptPubKey data pushes
- etc.

This way a full node might be able to tell what application (or type of
application) a light client is running, but not the client's addresses or
outputs, except maybe when the client originates transactions.

On Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Chris via bitcoin-dev
> <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> > On 06/01/2017 06:10 PM, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> >
> >> One aspect which isn't in this BIP draft is direct support for
> unconfirmed
> >> transactions. I consider such a feature an important UX feature for
> mobile
> >> phones, and something which I've personally seen as an important
> >> UX-experience when on-boarding new users to Bitcoin.
> >
> > Totally agree. My first thought is maybe you could keep bip37 filtering
> > as optional for unconfirmed transactions. Since you're only interested
>
> Really bad for privacy. Data for transactions at the tip is only
> 14kb/s-- potentially less if segwit is in use and you're not getting
> witnesses. Is that really that burdensome?
>
> FWIW, leaving a mobile browser just running while pointed at some
> websites seems to use more traffic than that just loading advertising.
> :)
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170601/cd98c32d/attachment.html>;

Author Public Key

npub1ej28vehtpaetsmlf0gzsv5d8v42ygu8xj9k837l2gmqqkke2z78snhyhjp

Seen on

wss://relay.nostr.band

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-07 18:02:06

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "c1884ccd8ede6863be1b93ae2506ad076a4372a7ad4c7b416ab8c31329f9fd15", "pubkey": "cc947666eb0f72b86fe97a050651a765544470e6916c78fbea46c00b5b2a178f", "created_at": 1686160926, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "55a56c7ebba05dd9613a9ae00ae6d5bbfa4f7fd0155fa447a7d09d61ff658a4b", "", "root" ], [ "e", "59a6666e794bab3cd8bfc92297840ac55745c373f7d773bd6a1d06659608d50b", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-06-02\n📝 Original message:I agree with Greg and Laolu; BIP-37 filtering for transactions is no better\nthan for blocks and completely destroys privacy.\n\nA constant stream of transactions is OK, but even cheaper for light clients\nwould be Laolu's proposal of streaming more tx data than existing inv\nmessages but less than existing tx messages.\n\nWe could make a bit field of things to include in every inv-with-metadata\nmessage, such as:\n- witness data\n- scriptSig data pushes\n- scriptPubKey\n- hash of scriptPubKey (unnecessary if full scriptPubKey is sent)\n- scriptPubKey data pushes\n- etc.\n\nThis way a full node might be able to tell what application (or type of\napplication) a light client is running, but not the client's addresses or\noutputs, except maybe when the client originates transactions.\n\nOn Thu, Jun 1, 2017 at 10:28 PM, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Chris via bitcoin-dev\n\u003e \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e On 06/01/2017 06:10 PM, Olaoluwa Osuntokun via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e One aspect which isn't in this BIP draft is direct support for\n\u003e unconfirmed\n\u003e \u003e\u003e transactions. I consider such a feature an important UX feature for\n\u003e mobile\n\u003e \u003e\u003e phones, and something which I've personally seen as an important\n\u003e \u003e\u003e UX-experience when on-boarding new users to Bitcoin.\n\u003e \u003e\n\u003e \u003e Totally agree. My first thought is maybe you could keep bip37 filtering\n\u003e \u003e as optional for unconfirmed transactions. Since you're only interested\n\u003e\n\u003e Really bad for privacy. Data for transactions at the tip is only\n\u003e 14kb/s-- potentially less if segwit is in use and you're not getting\n\u003e witnesses. Is that really that burdensome?\n\u003e\n\u003e FWIW, leaving a mobile browser just running while pointed at some\n\u003e websites seems to use more traffic than that just loading advertising.\n\u003e :)\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170601/cd98c32d/attachment.html\u003e", "sig": "5fad66decc03b91d6d0b6bf0db686be3ade9c5af7496ef6e0e29fa662b16d8c67fe6ff8dc31950c02fb624bfb2c743ed1abfc0de0517549126e93fb59ba11ec3" }