📅 Original date posted:2015-08-01 📝 Original message: > Sent: Saturday, August ...

Christopher Jamthagen [ARCHIVE] /

npub145g…vvwf

2023-06-09 12:43:54

in reply to nevent1q…8820

📅 Original date posted:2015-08-01
📝 Original message:
> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 at 12:41 PM
> From: "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo at gmail.com>
> To: "Christopher Jamthagen" <cjamthagen at gmx.com>
> Cc: "Rusty Russell" <rusty at rustcorp.com.au>, "lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org" <lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] Stealing money from a hub?
>> On Aug 1, 2015, at 3:30 AM, Christopher Jamthagen <cjamthagen at gmx.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 at 11:57 AM
>>> From: "Eric Lombrozo" <elombrozo at gmail.com>
>>> To: "Rusty Russell" <rusty at rustcorp.com.au>
>>> Cc: "Christopher Jamthagen" <cjamthagen at gmx.com>, "lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org" <lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] Stealing money from a hub?
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 30, 2015, at 4:48 PM, Rusty Russell <rusty at rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
>>> But I realized yesterday, outsourcing needs a new sighash op mode (or
>>> normalized txids), so it's not really something to design a deployable
>>> system around today.
>>> Can you elaborate on this, Rusty?
>>
>> We wont know the txid of the revoked commitment transaction until the cheater signs and broadcasts it, thus we cannot pre-sign the stealing transaction for the third party.

> Got it. I suppose it would still be possible to have the third party notify you and request a signature when it occurs so that your device doesn’t have to sit and monitor the network and do the > filtering, etc...

Once notified I could just sign the stealing transaction and take all the money myself.

Author Public Key

npub145gyety0mxgecedzm70fzqtx72s4zwz9lhar0lgs7yrravf02f2qvcvvwf

Seen on

wss://relay.nostr.band

Show more details

Published at

2023-06-09 12:43:54

Kind type

1 Short Text Note

Event JSON

{ "id": "280387dcc6e219e4960090ba9127751f65e6b8c7957a343b7ee757ff8c0de1e5", "pubkey": "ad104cac8fd9919c65a2df9e910166f2a1513845fdfa37fd10f1063eb12f5254", "created_at": 1686314634, "kind": 1, "tags": [ [ "e", "bd7e3601ad88d218940ec74c685433092458d0efc616b43a30f14fda82e7310e", "", "root" ], [ "e", "a13df4410a42ceb99221b27aa1bcf1fcb441bcc74c868f5ef52fe1c2cdc2c945", "", "reply" ], [ "p", "e899768d254f3537af7e26455968583632d0ab0bd4c780445eacfa087ac80d8f" ] ], "content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-08-01\n📝 Original message:\n\u003e Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 at 12:41 PM\n\u003e From: \"Eric Lombrozo\" \u003celombrozo at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e To: \"Christopher Jamthagen\" \u003ccjamthagen at gmx.com\u003e\n\u003e Cc: \"Rusty Russell\" \u003crusty at rustcorp.com.au\u003e, \"lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\" \u003clightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] Stealing money from a hub?\n\u003e\u003e On Aug 1, 2015, at 3:30 AM, Christopher Jamthagen \u003ccjamthagen at gmx.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 at 11:57 AM\n\u003e\u003e\u003e From: \"Eric Lombrozo\" \u003celombrozo at gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e To: \"Rusty Russell\" \u003crusty at rustcorp.com.au\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Cc: \"Christopher Jamthagen\" \u003ccjamthagen at gmx.com\u003e, \"lightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\" \u003clightning-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Subject: Re: [Lightning-dev] Stealing money from a hub?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e\u003e On Jul 30, 2015, at 4:48 PM, Rusty Russell \u003crusty at rustcorp.com.au\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\u003e\u003e But I realized yesterday, outsourcing needs a new sighash op mode (or\n\u003e\u003e\u003e normalized txids), so it's not really something to design a deployable\n\u003e\u003e\u003e system around today.\n\u003e\u003e\u003e Can you elaborate on this, Rusty?\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\u003e We wont know the txid of the revoked commitment transaction until the cheater signs and broadcasts it, thus we cannot pre-sign the stealing transaction for the third party.\n\n\u003e Got it. I suppose it would still be possible to have the third party notify you and request a signature when it occurs so that your device doesn’t have to sit and monitor the network and do the \u003e filtering, etc...\n\nOnce notified I could just sign the stealing transaction and take all the money myself.", "sig": "74ba880a84820b1eb5ece1be9557a8c9938a6f55712e41ebf4a143259d5b628eb436cdba853f3d7f393e95e6759c70758b7e1da157e58b2e496f72c83e061f07" }