From: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
To: jl2012@xbt.hk
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A compromise between BIP101 and Pieter's proposal
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2015 15:17:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CALqxMTHFy0F6ov1_H+MkQ+6succ2pxqOWuYJkR57HBtRMU+AGQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150731130714.Horde.PvL1IB3Kf5S6GAA73N-HOw1@server47.web-hosting.com>
That's all well and fine. But the pattern of your argument I would
say is "arguing security down" ie saying something is not secure
anyway, nothing is secure, everything could be hacked, so lets forget
that and give up, so that what is left is basically no
decentralisation security.
It is not paranoid to take decentralisation security seriously, it is
necessary because it is critical to Bitcoin. Security in depth
meaning take what security you can get from available defences.
Adam
On 31 July 2015 at 15:07, <jl2012@xbt.hk> wrote:
> Yes, data-center operators are bound to follow laws, including NSLs and gag
> orders. How about your ISP? Is it bound to follow laws, including NSLs and
> gag orders?
> https://edri.org/irish_isp_introduces_blocking/
>
> Do you think everyone should run a full node behind TOR? No way, your
> repressive government could just block TOR:
> http://www.technologyreview.com/view/427413/how-china-blocks-the-tor-anonymity-network/
>
> Or they could raid your home and seize your Raspberry Pi if they couldn't
> read your encrypted internet traffic. You will have a hard time proving you
> are not using TOR for child porn or cocaine.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encryption_ban_proposal_in_the_United_Kingdom
>
> If you are living in a country like this, running Bitcoin in an offshore VPS
> could be much easier. Anyway, Bitcoin shouldn't be your first thing to worry
> about. Revolution is probably your only choice.
>
> Data-centers would get hacked. How about your Raspberry Pi?
>
> Corrupt data-center employee is probably the only valid concern. However,
> there is nothing (except cost) to stop you from establishing multiple full
> nodes all over the world. If your Raspberry Pi at home could no longer fully
> validate the chain, it could become a header-only node to make sure your VPS
> full nodes are following the correct chaintip. You may even buy hourly
> charged cloud hosting in different countries to run header-only nodes at
> negligible cost.
>
> There is no single point of failure in a decentralized network. Having
> multiple nodes will also save you from Sybil attack and geopolitical risks.
> Again, if all data-centres and governments in the world are turning against
> Bitcoin, it is delusional to think we could fight against them without using
> any real weapon.
>
> By the way, I'm quite confident that my current full node at home are
> capable of running at 8MB blocks.
>
>
>
> Quoting Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>:
>
>> I think trust the data-center logic obviously fails, and I was talking
>> about this scenario in the post you are replying to. You are trusting the
>> data-center operator period. If one could trust data-centers to run
>> verified code, to not get hacked, filter traffic, respond to court orders
>> without notifying you etc that would be great but that's unfortunately not
>> what happens.
>>
>> Data-center operators are bound to follow laws, including NSLs and gag
>> orders. They also get hacked, employ humans who can be corrupt,
>> blackmailed, and themselves centralisation points for policy attack.
>> Snowden related disclosures and keeping aware of security show this is
>> very
>> real.
>>
>> This isn't much about bitcoin even, its just security reality for hosting
>> anything intended to be secure via decentralisation, or just hosting in
>> general while at risk of political or policy attack.
>>
>> Adam
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-31 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-31 8:39 [bitcoin-dev] A compromise between BIP101 and Pieter's proposal jl2012
2015-07-31 10:16 ` Adam Back
2015-07-31 13:07 ` jl2012
2015-07-31 13:17 ` Adam Back [this message]
2015-07-31 16:22 ` Dave Scotese
2015-07-31 18:04 ` G. Andrew Stone
2015-07-31 13:12 ` Ivan Brightly
2015-08-01 20:45 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-08-01 23:57 ` Tom Harding
2015-08-02 7:16 ` jl2012
2015-08-02 8:03 ` odinn
2015-08-02 10:32 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-08-02 10:38 ` Venzen Khaosan
2015-08-02 22:07 ` Dave Scotese
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=CALqxMTHFy0F6ov1_H+MkQ+6succ2pxqOWuYJkR57HBtRMU+AGQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=adam@cypherspace.org \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jl2012@xbt.hk \
/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