[bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Hi, I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the attached doc. Please provide your feedback and suggestions. Best, Prabhat Kumar Singh Title: A AML KYC enforcement mechanism to regulate OFAC(and similar others) fr

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Are you aware of the prior work in this field? https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/1qmbtu/mike_hearn_chair_of_the_bitcoin_foundations_law/ On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Hi, > > I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network and > also qualify use

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

I would prefer not to download an attachment. Generally and without having the benefit of reading your document, AML and or KYC requirements are treated on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis. You would probably need to factor obtaining a universal agreement between all of the governments and reg

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hello, Please stop with the nonsense. Bitcoin is a decentralized payment network. It operates globally, so neither jurisdiction can apply to it and have effects. It is the sole responsibility of all the users/businesses involved in Bitcoin to comply

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 12:38:42PM +0930, Rusty Russell via bitcoin-dev wrote: > So I'd like an IsStandard() rule to say it nLockTime be 0 if an > nSequence != 0x. Would that screw anyone currently? That sentence doesn't quite parse ("say it nLockTime"), so please forgive me if I'm misunde

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Thanks for the comments and feedback. I have previously read those threads as suggested by some members. In relation with transactions, I do agree with suggestions that they should be left on their own, and assumed that people would work in the best interest of themselves and society. Everything i

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Very good, I can't wait to see it. Please code it up and submit a pull request to github. Don't expect someone will do it for you. prabhat via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-08-27 08:06 寫到: snip. Folks, suggest something, scrap my idea, but let's build something to save this ecosystem, otherwise it is

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Yes, on it. Prabhat Kumar Singh On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 5:44 PM, wrote: > Very good, I can't wait to see it. Please code it up and submit a pull > request to github. Don't expect someone will do it for you. > > prabhat via bitcoin-dev 於 2015-08-27 08:06 寫到: > > snip. >> > > > Folks, suggest

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime

Rusty Russell 於 2015-08-26 23:08 寫到: - We should immediately deploy an IsStandard() rule which insists that nSequence is 0x or 0, so nobody screws themselves when we soft fork and they had random junk in there. This is not needed because BIP68 is not active for version 1 tx. No exi

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Have you talked with anybody at the Bitcoin Foundation about this proposal? As Chief Scientist of the Foundation, I am strongly opposed to any proposal that puts the Foundation in a position of centralized authority, so this is unacceptable: "The Bitcoin Foundation will act as fair play party and

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Fine point. So where is the solution? What to do? Prabhat Kumar Singh Prabhat Kumar Singh On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 6:58 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote: > Have you talked with anybody at the Bitcoin Foundation about this proposal? > > As Chief Scientist of the Foundation, I am strongly opposed to an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 9:39 AM, prabhat wrote: > So where is the solution? What to do? > This is a development list; organizations like https://coincenter.org/ work on high-level policy issues. Last I heard, competent law enforcement organizations said they were perfectly capable of tracking d

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

On 08/27/2015 09:39 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Fine point. > > So where is the solution? What to do? How about nothing. ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Dynamically Controlled Bitcoin Block Size Max Cap [BIP 1xx - Draft]

Proposal 1 does not deal with Tx fee. Proposal 2 does. According to proposal 2, miners wont be able to increase or decrease Max Block Size only by manipulating Tx fee. They have to manipulate... i. Tx fee of ~4000 blocks. ii. Block size of ~4000 blocks. I never proposed *next block collects Tx fee

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Questiosn about BIP100

I have been reading the pdf and one thing I can't figure out is what you mean by "most common floor". Is that the smallest block size that has a vote or the block size with the most votes or something else? On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 10:40 AM Jeff Garzik wrote: > Great questions. > > - Currently wo

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Guys, I strongly think the original prabhat e-mail is a parody. And I find very funny that important people have responded. But maybe I'm wrong! *:)* El jue., 27 ago. 2015 a las 11:04, Chris Pacia via bitcoin-dev (< bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>) escribió: > > > On 08/27/2015 09:39

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

So where is the solution? What to do? AML-KYC is mostly something that sits on top of the Bitcoin protocol. Take Coinase, inc. as an example. They check bank accounts before they open your account and they link your Bitcoin address to your account in their database. Then they ask for an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

So you mean that, 1. Govt agencies already know about everything and anything this subject is about, but passively. 2. Due to passive nature, the actions are post incident and not pre. So there is a risk of many ticking time-bombs which some JB (Jack Bauer or James Bond or Jai Singh

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

>>>But money is attached to life and not liberty I can't truly express in this email exactly how much I personally disagree with that statement/belief because I don't think the dev mailing list is the appropriate forum for such philosophical discussions. I will say this, though: I think you've mi

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

I Truly respect your opinions. Prabhat Kumar Singh On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:25 AM, Oliver Petruzel wrote: > >>>But money is attached to life and not liberty > > I can't truly express in this email exactly how much I personally disagree > with that statement/belief because I don't think the d

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

Prabhat, You write about OFAC, KYC, and AML. The *Office of Foreign Assets Control* (*OFAC*) is a financial intelligence and enforcement agency of the U.S. government charged with planning and execution of economic and trade sanctions

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Questiosn about BIP100

20th percentile, though there is some argument to take the 'mode' of several tranches On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Andrew C wrote: > I have been reading the pdf and one thing I can't figure out is what you > mean by "most common floor". Is that the smallest block size that has a > vote or

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Splitting BIPs

I posted a new draft of the proposal: http://blockhawk.net/bitcoin-dev/bipwiki.html The subsections still need to be fleshed out a bit more. I'd love any comments or suggestions. On Mon, Aug 24, 2015, 4:30 PM Eric Lombrozo wrote: > Also, the current "type" attribute needs modification. There ar

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP: Using Median time-past as endpoint for locktime calculations

This BIP was assigned number 113. I have updated the text accordingly and added credits to Gregory Maxwell. Please see the changes in the pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/182 On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 1:57 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 12:13:09P

Re: [bitcoin-dev] CLTV/CSV/etc. deployment considerations due to XT/Not-BitcoinXT miners

I have changed BIPS 112 and 113 to reflect this amended deployment strategy. I'm beginning to think the issues created by Bitcoin XT are so serious it probably deserves converting OPs text into an informational BIP. On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 6:42 PM, Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev wrote: > No, th

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP: Using Median time-past as endpoint for locktime calculations

On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:08:32PM +0100, Btc Drak wrote: > This BIP was assigned number 113. > > I have updated the text accordingly and added credits to Gregory Maxwell. > > Please see the changes in the pull request: > https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/182 On Thu, Aug 27, 2015 at 11:11:10P

Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP-draft] CHECKSEQUENCEVERIFY - An opcode for relative locktime

So I've created 2 new repositories with changed rules regarding sequencenumbers: https://github.com/maaku/bitcoin/tree/sequencenumbers2 This repository inverts (un-inverts?) the sequence number. nSequence=1 means 1 block relative lock-height. nSequence=LOCKTIME_THRESHOLD means 1 second relative l

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 No. On 08/27/2015 01:10 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Hi, > > I am proposing to create a AML-KYC module to control the network > and also qualify use cases in OFAC compliant way. Here is the > attached doc. > > Please provide your feedback an

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Well, On 08/27/2015 06:39 AM, prabhat via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Fine point. > > So where is the solution? What to do? You could study bitcoin some more and understand what it is instead of proposing to "implement AML-KYC in bitcoin" which shows vast

Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIPS proposal for implementing AML-KYC in bitcoin

I've done some work in this area. see http://coinvalidation.com/ it's currently shelved due to lack of legal and regulatory framework. 1. this should not be directly implemented on the protocol level. I believe its Jeff Garzik who once said "stolen bitcoins is a legal problem, not a technical one.

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Questiosn about BIP100

Mode could be ruled out immediately. Just consider this: 34% 8MB, 33% 1.5MB, 33% 1.2MB I personally believe the median is the most natural and logical choice. 51% of miners can always force the 49% to follow the simple majority choice through a 51% attack. Using median will eliminate the incen