public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pavol Rusnak <stick@satoshilabs.com>
To: rhavar@protonmail.com,
	 Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
	<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Transaction Input/Output Sorting
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2018 23:54:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAF90Avnbxd3HA0yPcr929sf0o7ihF3SgcnCfqbvAeA8uxZa4Og@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <sKbqoBddMV_gqKR8AIje8pbaF9FMc0gy636OOtI5jqszGH6lRrLtDtd_bQBB_d01vexaI17N4k_Zss8aeDOOsE51VDeQ7RGC2cxv1nnc--0=@protonmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1802 bytes --]

Your solution in the second part of the email does not solve the problem
you indicated in the first part of your email.

On Sun, Oct 21, 2018, 23:41 Ryan Havar via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Right now it's just *way* too easy to spot the boundaries between
> different wallets. There's a lot of things that contribute to that, but the
> one that concerns me the most is the way wallets sort transaction inputs
> and outputs.
>
> Some wallets and protocols (especially HW wallets) have a strong
> preference for deterministic sorting (i.e. using bip69), while other
> wallets have a lot of objections to this.
>
> I'm not sure I fully understand the objections, but I think they can be
> summarized as "during the transition period there will be a lot of privacy
> loss" and "if in the future someone wants to use bitcoin in a way that's
> not compatible with bip69 their transactions will stick out heavily".
>
> I wonder if this impasse could be solved with deterministic sorting, but
> based on a semi-secret.  Like  `sortingSecret = hmac(walletSeed,
> "sortingSecret")` and then there's a standardized sort order based on the
> sortingSecret. e.g. sort inputs/output by the  `hash(data ||
> sortingSecret)`.   Wallets could come up with their own way of computing
> (or storing) the "sortingSecret" but from there it's standardized.
>
> I has the advantages of deterministic sorting (as long as you know the
> sortingSecret) you can verify it's done correctly and externally looks
> totally randomized.
>
> Am I missing something, or could this be the way forward?
>
> -Ryan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3940 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2018-10-21 21:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-10-21 19:00 [bitcoin-dev] Transaction Input/Output Sorting rhavar
2018-10-21 21:54 ` Pavol Rusnak [this message]
2018-10-22  1:54   ` rhavar
2018-10-23 14:29     ` Chris Belcher
2018-10-24 16:12       ` Gregory Maxwell
2018-10-24 17:52         ` rhavar
2018-10-24 18:21           ` rhavar

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=CAF90Avnbxd3HA0yPcr929sf0o7ihF3SgcnCfqbvAeA8uxZa4Og@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=stick@satoshilabs.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=rhavar@protonmail.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