From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::137]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 917A4C002D for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 20:21:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5E0E84181D for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 20:21:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 5E0E84181D Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=Do87E6CY X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.198 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.198 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id sNOquNLWDTtv for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 20:21:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 0858F417BC Received: from mail-lj1-x233.google.com (mail-lj1-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::233]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0858F417BC for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 20:20:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lj1-x233.google.com with SMTP id bx13so3734948ljb.1 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:20:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=LHAXLykUpSF10SkarsjaURqsoDLci1wkTWvLeLMeiN0=; b=Do87E6CYjuzAy2pivKtPlW1U5ezleOMELPzmdiC4XvRl+Xa79h8I0Zu/KSOPzs3xoo pNNYAF4zr+yJBK2UWiNKCceUT8BZtpXNhZuaO2z0KgF3zjPzDvEZEGCDFANnH+PuJeOT Qau7l9//Cj0Row2J8sSOv1qeU5Xpw4ysr/sQlVD7ZytljCAejds+8lcuVXcLvMb35Hsy 6kXt/qqqpmWyOAz1Ams91zc05NZO2kq8C1M6z/Lv20ibHP1ZfJIYDjPkbcs/2OkB2Ht+ aAHP1MY15V5IvQksU+KWVDbAkGJysL7zbLRuAt9REPnQBJUnWI36xSm+zNZTOeb7BcPp iFuw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=LHAXLykUpSF10SkarsjaURqsoDLci1wkTWvLeLMeiN0=; b=MqwbDRfAsLXf4qBf8z9b9YT8wQvHlYXvtqgxto7zMDBwgpGveoVH49I9tMa6JH3JU1 RXdbE/tzKGWMpRl1LnxWyJuQ5jg2rXeFtVOUzFad1hF+ZNnW8/BfzrhnL60+9X/vTbc7 pDlajXpLtym1DnxEfIJpHgOcpMVdbFu0r4AZnvqxXC9CvQCOgSYvba83EuyxZ3oXr2gu JsInDTtkR9w6FYzrF2+bGC3IUHgfGL9pI4QOiv+hmYemTzhB3mV4c4wxUjy8ClKpa08R iKVeiKDJZqJaXevmTY6XDz05UmnwHA1N61P9WswWQum8E52aIVqpJIjU3u1KFvXuQA4U yX+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8XgtjXybI2EWI9XjzeAGMKWRUhnKZABRW6FE7NuiqoWHI7dliA RCIuHVdPdlcZOQICeobZUbaThBpLTbJrVvKStyY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1uftoplMbDd5Th9B1VZwq0uSYGAtmPQE215E7E4/Q9GH79vL/e5gEcJP1TYsZgyfANG8ot57lNu6pmnYn/eggg= X-Received: by 2002:a05:651c:1790:b0:259:1115:1af8 with SMTP id bn16-20020a05651c179000b0025911151af8mr7689664ljb.520.1656361257872; Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:20:57 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Bryan Bishop Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 15:20:45 -0500 Message-ID: To: Alfred Hodler , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion , Bryan Bishop Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006531d305e273a8c5" Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP proposal] Private Payments X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 20:21:01 -0000 --0000000000006531d305e273a8c5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Hi, On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 2:14 PM Alfred Hodler via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > 2. Notification transactions still exist but no longer leave a privacy > footprint on the blockchain. Instead, a notification transaction is simply > a single OP_RETURN containing a value that only Alice and Bob can > calculate. If Alice's notification transaction uses UTXOs not associated > with her identity, there is never a footprint showing that either her or > Bob are using private payments. If Alice uses tainted coins, only she is > exposed as a user of Private Payments but Bob still isn't. > That's a neat trick. What about not using OP_RETURN at all, and just publishing on a tor hidden service that other wallets check? Alice wouldn't have to expose on-chain that she is a sender of a private payment. - Bryan https://twitter.com/kanzure --0000000000006531d305e273a8c5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

On Mon, Jun 27, 2022 at 2:14 PM Alfred Hodler via = bitcoin-dev <bi= tcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
2. Notification transactions still exist but no longer leave a privacy foot= print on the blockchain. Instead, a notification transaction is simply a si= ngle OP_RETURN containing a value that only Alice and Bob can calculate. If= Alice's notification transaction uses UTXOs not associated with her id= entity, there is never a footprint showing that either her or Bob are using= private payments. If Alice uses tainted coins, only she is exposed as a us= er of Private Payments but Bob still isn't.

Th= at's a neat trick. What about not using OP_RETURN at all, and just publ= ishing on a tor hidden service that=C2=A0other wallets check?=C2=A0 Alice w= ouldn't have to expose on-chain that she is a sender of a private payme= nt.

- Bryan
--0000000000006531d305e273a8c5--