public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeremy <jlrubin@mit.edu>
To: lists@coryfields.com, adam.ficsor73@gmail.com
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Replacement for RBF and CPFP: Non-Destructive TXID Dependencies for Fee Sponsoring
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 09:16:25 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAD5xwhhmA9C4aF4fybfObzdGY752r74ByUfQBZzQ5rz-sR+qoQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAApLimiFXmX6OPe6wsvvV3YeL8i0-Y7RVvugzLBeADh3go-BzQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 825 bytes --]

Hi Cory!

Thanks for taking a look. CC nopara as I think your questions are the same.

I think there are a few reason we won't see functionally worse privacy:

1. RBF/CPFP may require the use of an external to the original transaction
to pay sufficient fee.
2. RBF/CPFP may leak which address was the change and which was the payment.

In addition, I think there is a benefit in that:

1. RBF/CPFP requires access to the keys in the same 'security zone' as the
payment you made (e.g., if it's a multi-sig to multi-sig requires m of N to
cpfp/or RBF, whereas sponsors could be anyone).
2. Sponsors can be a fully separate arbitrary wallet.
3. You can continually coinjoin the funds in your fee-paying wallet without
tainting your main funds.
4. You can keep those funds in a lightning channel and pay your fees via
loop outs.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2919 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2020-09-19 16:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-09-19  0:51 [bitcoin-dev] A Replacement for RBF and CPFP: Non-Destructive TXID Dependencies for Fee Sponsoring Jeremy
2020-09-19  1:39 ` Cory Fields
2020-09-19 16:16   ` Jeremy [this message]
2020-09-19 13:37 ` David A. Harding
2020-09-19 15:01   ` nopara73
2020-09-19 16:30   ` Jeremy
2020-09-19 17:24     ` David A. Harding
2020-09-19 18:39 ` Antoine Riard
2020-09-19 19:13   ` Antoine Riard
2020-09-19 19:46     ` Jeremy
2020-09-20 23:10       ` Antoine Riard
2020-09-21 14:52         ` David A. Harding
2020-09-21 16:27           ` Jeremy
2020-09-21 23:40             ` Antoine Riard
2020-09-22 18:05             ` Suhas Daftuar
2020-09-23 22:10               ` Jeremy
2020-09-24  4:22                 ` Dmitry Petukhov
2020-09-22  6:24 ArmchairCryptologist
2020-09-22 13:52 ` Antoine Riard

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAD5xwhhmA9C4aF4fybfObzdGY752r74ByUfQBZzQ5rz-sR+qoQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=jlrubin@mit.edu \
    --cc=adam.ficsor73@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=lists@coryfields.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body. 
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox