Matt Corallo [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2020-01-27 📝 Original message: Note that there's no real ...
📅 Original date posted:2020-01-27
📝 Original message:
Note that there's no real reason lightning nodes *have* to have
confidence in that - if a node routes your payment to the next hop, how
they do it doesn't really matter. Allowing things like non-lightning
"channels" (eg just a contractual agreement to settle up later between
two mutually-trusting parties) would actually be quite compelling.
The reason lightning nodes *today* require proof-of-funds-locked is
largely for DoS resistance, effectively rate-limiting flooding the
global routing table with garbage, but such rate-limiting could be
accomplished (albeit with a ton more complexity) via other means.
Matt
On 1/27/20 7:50 AM, Ugam Kamat 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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
>
📝 Original message:
Note that there's no real reason lightning nodes *have* to have
confidence in that - if a node routes your payment to the next hop, how
they do it doesn't really matter. Allowing things like non-lightning
"channels" (eg just a contractual agreement to settle up later between
two mutually-trusting parties) would actually be quite compelling.
The reason lightning nodes *today* require proof-of-funds-locked is
largely for DoS resistance, effectively rate-limiting flooding the
global routing table with garbage, but such rate-limiting could be
accomplished (albeit with a ton more complexity) via other means.
Matt
On 1/27/20 7:50 AM, Ugam Kamat 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.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lightning-dev mailing list
> Lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/lightning-dev
>