From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <bfd@cock.lu>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE163B9E
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2017 13:08:08 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from cock.li (cock.li [185.100.85.212])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB2B6E9
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue, 20 Jun 2017 13:08:07 +0000 (UTC)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cock.lu; s=mail;
	t=1497964084; bh=mUt88oOcfJCkz7jhXkqsnEpPH/dchMWJ/MiIbp9B6U4=;
	h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=UEQc36weNCjFxwG93RJau4coGeDsQoLS/F9puVVD6KimXe6ho2X1Wfbyf573XN2RQ
	ZuMuAKvwk8GalgfIMOj844Rysgk0h0ABIuhUa66Kcp+PcX6/f8UzUq2Gtvwdu69Ofp
	CCS4lxwrqKUQOxm5FYkMisjR14u2aXpXR030OYQS1vsyFErDV0cRnlmIZwllxmIqPs
	Q+KNqbmhibPlzwaTFKsxmkyuB5Y0VeTnXJq0EIclZqm0gpU6+MmyVLmmorO3eXX2qr
	JzhBQHQHm2PpdclxGgLX0TjhKotS+EIIGviPuvDXj1sFjMoA1HywuHQ0j+/+coAnWY
	04SvTrICrnpIQ==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 16:08:03 +0300
From: bfd@cock.lu
To: Tom Zander <tomz@freedommail.ch>
In-Reply-To: <29376397.dRe9PMdyPS@strawberry>
References: <CAO3Pvs8ccTkgrecJG6KFbBW+9moHF-FTU+4qNfayeE3hM9uRrg@mail.gmail.com>
	<537fb7106e0387c77537f0b1279cbeca@cock.lu>
	<CAAS2fgQ4nfYrRasm7jwx4B86fNKb6NvpHy-Dt=3bfiaNt10snA@mail.gmail.com>
	<29376397.dRe9PMdyPS@strawberry>
Message-ID: <3d4e50fe9f582066d1d6de0565132b5b@cock.lu>
X-Sender: bfd@cock.lu
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.2.3
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 13:40:19 +0000
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP Proposal: Compact Client Side Filtering for
 Light Clients
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 13:08:09 -0000

On 2017-06-20 12:52, Tom Zander via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Second, stating that a bloom filter is a "total loss of privacy" is 
> equally
> baseless and doesn’t need debunking.
> 

"On the Privacy Provisions of Bloom Filters in Lightweight Bitcoin 
Clients"

> We show analytically and empirically that the reliance on Bloom filters 
> within existing SPV clients leaks considerable information about the 
> addresses of Bitcoin users. Our results show that an SPV client who 
> uses a modest number of Bitcoin addresses (e.g., < 20) risks revealing 
> almost all of his addresses.

https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/763.pdf