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 C6461C002D for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 00:00:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2AB840951 for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 00:00:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.601 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com 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 Gtt040apvatk for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 00:00:28 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0 Received: from mail-40138.protonmail.ch (mail-40138.protonmail.ch [185.70.40.138]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE05A4094C for ; Mon, 16 May 2022 00:00:27 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 16 May 2022 00:00:16 +0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail2; t=1652659225; x=1652918425; bh=bjMtfCD3C0EjL+WnSlrqAokimtWy9WyV9IZz1GdoD5Y=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To: References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To: Feedback-ID:Message-ID; b=H8yPOqVqDgkR6H1nyHR/zHibwD4trxKDoDRPYDEDEh8FCxKqpqdari1zv6bd4xPPe HIZB2X31J+roMqmLYl0xDV6cABkCRxE4JYm331cwckaoPJaBx279ks5J9n9bmQjOFN Ks0SGiPnqMC9JYayoeilJrTdy7aCmmalf5Uje0gSa76s92vVG0ON4P7Sr62dqYEB8t eVZ3i/wauoQMEuQuHwF7a2K9uMIsY6MnVuQ+j5Ehpf5UMnl1wA6s1dbHztfA2T3MFE RmFAcsNTe3pVwekRJkax7K1W0WwJx+UPTQU4SHXuhurFF1pqSKYO63tKL8ZsSP7h8Y EHSMChk4uuW9Q== To: Chris Belcher From: ZmnSCPxj Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: <22c80504-e648-e021-866e-ca5a5db3b247@riseup.net> <82948428-29a3-e50a-a54a-520a83f39bba@riseup.net> <6IPqvNW2vQcHQLhUgSmQQLqtnV0RGrsUfnoUMKgv0SDQpVvKh7PIqJOKNazzgEzGE2W5OHHrlEtmg9lapjbiSjTpUuxqPmsiFua2P_ZN_FY=@protonmail.com> <05fdc268-1701-cd62-181d-906b6b5d4f9d@riseup.net> Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Timelocked address fidelity bond for BIP39 seeds 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, 16 May 2022 00:00:28 -0000 Good morning Chris, > Yes linking the two identities (joinmarket maker and teleport maker) > together slightly degrades privacy, but that has to be balanced against > the privacy loss of leaving both systems open to sybil attacks. Without > fidelity bonds the two systems can be sybil attacked just by using about > five-figures USD, and the attack can get these coins back at any time > when they're finished. I am not saying "do not use fidelity bonds at all", I am saying "maybe we s= hould disallow a fidelity bond used in JoinMarket from being used in Telepo= rt and vice versa". Regards, ZmnSCPxj