[bitcoin-dev] Unique node identifiers
eric at voskuil.org
Wed Mar 8 21:09:05 UTC 2017
On 03/08/2017 11:47 AM, Jonas Schnelli wrote:
>>> Nodes are by design not supposed to be identifiable in any way
>> This is of course my objection to BIP150 ("a way for peers to ...
>> guarantee node ownership“).
> Please Eric. Stop spreading FUD.
I'm always willing to debate this issue. I'm generally a little
suspicious of one who demands another person to stop arguing. I got at
least one such demand (along with a threat) on this subject privately
last summer from a notable Core dev. There is a lengthy thread on this
subject in which I raised these issues. Everyone is free to review that
> BIP150 has a fingerprint-free **OPTIONAL** authentication. It’s designed
> to not reveal any node identifier/identity without first get a
> crypto.-proof from other peer that he already knows your identity.
> **Peers can’t be identified without having the identity-keys pre shared
> by the node operators.**
The "presharing" of keys is how provable identity works, and is
precisely what this new proposal is also promoting. And in response to
that, the above statement was made by a Core dev (and not disputed):
>>> Nodes are by design not supposed to be identifiable in any way...
I'm calling out the obvious relationship between BIP150 and this new
proposal. Restating how identity works, or that its use is optional does
not refute my position. It's not FUD.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
More information about the bitcoin-dev