From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E5BC279 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:04:35 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lb0-f171.google.com (mail-lb0-f171.google.com [209.85.217.171]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 165C311B for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:04:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lbbqi7 with SMTP id qi7so59474237lbb.3 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=OYgTQOJA6o15euqxGwa763mSO33GkQI5i+jobhBPUKU=; b=BcjSB2XNcSdOY4GljelW1MYLubwDCNaevGINmkWp4c2U8Pv6hNWN/sAWdvA/AxPOtu cseo9nQQ9TYQm52JoZwIm9lcWhpvyzudwr1VT69+6unSRODuiMW9BJb+tLywXPpFogId ikt1XdKcB7DP3e6PUpMwZFe9R3anb0WWFzp1he/AB4Xn32WzJOa1pJTCbOPRc2b0u0HB Ko5nZ3m1yMwYs1WhdGx3Ji74HyeTukozs4sPzIzQDUj4U9EG0p4rAYIibmfiSIpdkFy+ cw4838KQO/XwNHAfBkCNFdSA8jZk4HSWjCSc6jVjokMh05evXUJ28W2RgxO1403v5OJ4 j7Yw== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.36.196 with SMTP id s4mr3132151laj.10.1437581072518; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.184.175 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.184.175 with HTTP; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 09:04:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <55AFBBE6.3060702@electrum.org> References: <55AFBBE6.3060702@electrum.org> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 18:04:32 +0200 Message-ID: From: Natanael To: Thomas Voegtlin Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0160bb1629d451051b78ed64 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Making Electrum more anonymous X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 16:04:35 -0000 --089e0160bb1629d451051b78ed64 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 - Sent from my tablet Den 22 jul 2015 17:51 skrev "Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev" < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>: > > Hello, > > Although Electrum clients connect to several servers in order to fetch > block headers, they typically request address balances and address > histories from a single server. This means that the chosen server knows > that a given set of addresses belong to the same wallet. That is true > even if Electrum is used over TOR. > > There have been various proposals to improve on that, but none of them > really convinced me so far. One recurrent proposal has been to create > subsets of wallet addresses, and to send them to separate servers. In my > opinion, this does not really improve anonymity, because it requires > trusting more servers. > > Here is an idea, inspired by TOR, on which I would like to have some > feedback: We create an anonymous routing layer between Electrum servers > and clients. Why not look at something like Dissent? http://dedis.cs.yale.edu/dissent/ This protocol reduces the impact of Sybil attacks. --089e0160bb1629d451051b78ed64 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8

- Sent from my tablet
Den 22 jul 2015 17:51 skrev "Thomas Voegtlin via bitcoin-dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>:
>
> Hello,
>
> Although Electrum clients connect to several servers in order to fetch
> block headers, they typically request address balances and address
> histories from a single server. This means that the chosen server knows
> that a given set of addresses belong to the same wallet. That is true
> even if Electrum is used over TOR.
>
> There have been various proposals to improve on that, but none of them
> really convinced me so far. One recurrent proposal has been to create
> subsets of wallet addresses, and to send them to separate servers. In my
> opinion, this does not really improve anonymity, because it requires
> trusting more servers.
>
> Here is an idea, inspired by TOR, on which I would like to have some
> feedback: We create an anonymous routing layer between Electrum servers
> and clients.

Why not look at something like Dissent? http://dedis.cs.yale.edu/dissent/

This protocol reduces the impact of Sybil attacks.

--089e0160bb1629d451051b78ed64--