Regarding privacy issue with Bloom filters, here are a few references: https://jonasnick.github.io/blog/2015/02/12/privacy-in-bitcoinj/ https://eprint.iacr.org/2014/763.pdf https://github.com/bisq-network/exchange/issues/487 https://bisq.network/blog/privacy-in-bitsquare/
Am Mittwoch, 11. Oktober 2017 19:08:00 UTC-5 schrieb Manfred Karrer: > > I had the same concerns regarding Bloq's seed node addition and removed it > from Bisq's BitcoinJ fork ( > https://github.com/bisq-network/bitcoinj/commit/7b2ed972fa09237a79388d39c49f51ee6aa17ac3 > ). > > Though there are much more problematic privacy issues with the broken > Bloom filter implementation and design. Any full node (operated by a > surveillance company like Skry) can find out that all wallet addresses > belong to one user and if you don't use Tor they even know your IP address. > > Unfortunately nobody is working on that to fix that. > > The chain blindness of BitcoinJ is another major concern not addressed as > far I know and will set BitcoinJ users at risk to spend their Bitcoin on a > chain which they don't want to support and/or get exposed to replay > attacks. Very concerning IMO! > > > Am Freitag, 29. September 2017 03:59:50 UTC-5 schrieb quantu...@gmail.com: >> >> I was recently made aware on Twitter than Bitcoinj updated its DNS seed >> node list to include Jeff Garzik's and Bloq's nodes. I would like to know >> why these were added, and why other 2x seed nodes were not. This bothers me >> both because of the(though a leap to a degree) concerns over Bloq's >> investment in Skry and acquiring its analytics software and techniques, and >> the fact that these seed nodes are running BTC1. >> >> This creates two problems in my mind. 1) It opens up all users of wallets >> basing off your version of Bitcoinj to be tagged and identified on a >> network level by a company that has directly invested in chain analytics >> company. This is a huge privacy risk for users. It also opens up the >> potential to be compromised in terms of the Bitcoin network as well as the >> seed nodes would decide what nodes to pass the new wallet off to. >> >> Which leads me to my next issue. These new seed nodes operating BTC1 >> creates a huge systemic risk for users in the event the NY Agreement is >> fulfilled and there is a fork in November. These new DNS seed additions >> could be guaranteeing wallets are connected to both network post-fork and >> cause unpredicted/detrimental behavior for users. >> >> I would ask that these additions be removed, and would like to know why >> they were added in the first place, as they introduce two different risk >> surfaces for your userbase that would not exist without them. >> >> Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns. >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "bitcoinj" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoinj+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
