From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133]) by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BCC9C016F for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 12:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7420A87DB0 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 12:16:14 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D2L888nVBDGL for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 12:16:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from w1.tutanota.de (w1.tutanota.de [81.3.6.162]) by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3BBDA87E25 for ; Mon, 25 May 2020 12:16:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from w3.tutanota.de (unknown [192.168.1.164]) by w1.tutanota.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49302FA030C; Mon, 25 May 2020 12:16:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1590408970; s=s1; d=tutanota.de; h=From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:Content-Description:Content-ID:Content-Type:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Cc:Date:Date:In-Reply-To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:References:Sender; bh=lozN64Hv5f7rXzjG7cgvWqEZkX35gOCAjziA9MeXsII=; b=XJhsgR4j1WIQ5DDLHu21Y/HbGp+f9N2izpmxIEhCM2Rl8gcc/nhE4DTzjhSSV+VS l5e7MdebYH35ODa3ZRDxSmVGNJ1qdWrEsnBhgBqP0MihUbU/dYLTFMTVHoYhlI5ZdEp qoS3mVryHJ2ybnnUrWTgk+yIyu2DyUdhF1CyMVcNJQw0qot7Cp62YzvAFUuCR68+4A1 iFjXgE24lqoYeBvgXgj+/XZvF8z/4yYKpkp9tftk7O+em19GWIsw3RearxJf4Eh5lSK l6hN1JcG8BUK/5XVg8IwbG/MtRreMdv8IlCmlFGqIN+6XXW8F/dLC7BrLq0gPHigWVu 7YMJGOlOUA== Date: Mon, 25 May 2020 14:16:10 +0200 (CEST) From: prayank@tutanota.de To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <3K6kmk75oNFwNf_E4xqPgf5URJOf4c64Iyxi1HOgEpvvZrdn_wBWxbx3hRBEDfu2MjC5kF6N0ejpjqeG_5FTGIFD_45sFyhLCtMvhJNdq3E=@protonmail.com> References: <3K6kmk75oNFwNf_E4xqPgf5URJOf4c64Iyxi1HOgEpvvZrdn_wBWxbx3hRBEDfu2MjC5kF6N0ejpjqeG_5FTGIFD_45sFyhLCtMvhJNdq3E=@protonmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_95414_1402029184.1590408970272" X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 25 May 2020 12:39:11 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Post-mix(coinjoin) usage with multisig and cpfp in bitcoin core wallet 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, 25 May 2020 12:16:14 -0000 ------=_Part_95414_1402029184.1590408970272 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello=C2=A0ZmnSCPxj,=20 Thanks for the feedback. 1. Peer 1 doesn't need to be a trusted third party, it can be implemented i= n a way that some peers involved in this system can provide liquidity for o= thers and incentives can be a small fee. 2. Yes joinmarket is awesome and its payjoin will be better to achieve the = same but I was trying to contribute and add more options for people to impr= ove privacy on Bitcoin. If we have different ways to mix it will be harder = for spy companies to analyze of some of the transactions. 3. Also one such setup might not make a huge difference but a chain of such= mixers will surely work better if everything done correctly.=C2=A0 4. Maybe multisig usage is not ideal for such things right now and I am not= the best person when it comes to coding but think that better privacy for = multisig will make it possible for lot of ideas to be implemented on Bitcoi= n using different multisig setups and combination of other things that we a= lready have.=C2=A0 Prayank May 25, 2020, 12:24 by ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com: > Good morning Prayank > >> I have explained the whole idea with a proof of concept in this link:=C2= =A0https://medium.com/@prayankgahlot/post-mix-usage-using-multisig-and-cpfp= -e6ce1fdd57a1 >> > > The article is not clear I think, so please confirm my understanding belo= w. > > Participants: > > * "Peer 3" - Payee > * "Peer 2" - Payer > * "Peer 1" - Enabling tr\*sted third party > > Goal: Payer wants to pay to the payee 0.006BTC > > Current Conditions: > > * Payer owns 0.01 BTC in a single UTXO > * Third Party owns 0.05 BTC in a single UTXO > > Protocol: > > 1. Payer and Third Party compute a 2-of-3 address with the public keys o= f Payer, Payee, and Third Party. > 2. Payer and Third Party individually pay their owned funds to the 2-of-= 3 address. > 3. After confirmation, they consume the new outputs into another transac= tion with equal-valued outputs, hiding who owns which coins. > > Is my understanding correct? > > If so, I believe JoinMarket has a superior technology, which does not req= uire a tr\*sted third party; it simply requires one or more UNtrusted third= parties to participate in signing a single transaction that does not requi= re paying to an intermediate m-of-n address (thus all inputs are singlesig)= . > > Basically JoinMarket allows the market taker to decide how much the equal= -value outputs are, and to define the address it goes to. > The destination address need not be one the market taker controls, it can= be to a payee. > This technique is the only out-of-the-box way that a JoinMarket wallet ca= n spend funds from a JoinMarket wallet. > > JoinMarket as well already includes how to get in touch with enabling thi= rd parties (called "market makers"). > > > Regards, > ZmnSCPxj > ------=_Part_95414_1402029184.1590408970272 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hello ZmnSCPxj,


Than= ks for the feedback.


1. Peer 1 = doesn't need to be a trusted third party, it can be implemented in a way th= at some peers involved in this system can provide liquidity for others and = incentives can be a small fee.

2. Yes joinmark= et is awesome and its payjoin will be better to achieve the same but I was = trying to contribute and add more options for people to improve privacy on = Bitcoin. If we have different ways to mix it will be harder for spy compani= es to analyze of some of the transactions.

3. = Also one such setup might not make a huge difference but a chain of such mi= xers will surely work better if everything done correctly. 
<= div>
4. Maybe multisig usage is not ideal for such things rig= ht now and I am not the best person when it comes to coding but think that = better privacy for multisig will make it possible for lot of ideas to be im= plemented on Bitcoin using different multisig setups and combination of oth= er things that we already have. 


Prayank



May 2= 5, 2020, 12:24 by ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com:
Good morning Prayank
I have ex= plained the whole idea with a proof of concept in this link: https://m= edium.com/@prayankgahlot/post-mix-usage-using-multisig-and-cpfp-e6ce1fdd57a= 1

The article is not clear I think, so = please confirm my understanding below.

Partici= pants:

* "Peer 3" - Payee
* "Pee= r 2" - Payer
* "Peer 1" - Enabling tr\*sted third party

Goal: Payer wants to pay to the payee 0.006BTC
<= /div>

Current Conditions:

*= Payer owns 0.01 BTC in a single UTXO
* Third Party owns 0.05= BTC in a single UTXO

Protocol:
=
1. Payer and Third Party compute a 2-of-3 address with the = public keys of Payer, Payee, and Third Party.
2. Payer and T= hird Party individually pay their owned funds to the 2-of-3 address.
3. After confirmation, they consume the new outputs into another t= ransaction with equal-valued outputs, hiding who owns which coins.

Is my understanding correct?

<= div>If so, I believe JoinMarket has a superior technology, which does not r= equire a tr\*sted third party; it simply requires one or more UNtrusted thi= rd parties to participate in signing a single transaction that does not req= uire paying to an intermediate m-of-n address (thus all inputs are singlesi= g).

Basically JoinMarket allows the market tak= er to decide how much the equal-value outputs are, and to define the addres= s it goes to.
The destination address need not be one the mar= ket taker controls, it can be to a payee.
This technique is t= he only out-of-the-box way that a JoinMarket wallet can spend funds from a = JoinMarket wallet.

JoinMarket as well already = includes how to get in touch with enabling third parties (called "market ma= kers").


Regards,
= ZmnSCPxj

------=_Part_95414_1402029184.1590408970272--