On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Ivan Pustogarov wrote:
> For each neighbour, a Bitcoin peer keeps the history of addresses that
> it forwarded to the neighbour. If an address was already forwarded
> to a neighbour it is not retransmitted again.
Okay, sorry, I thought you were saying something el
For each neighbour, a Bitcoin peer keeps the history of addresses that
it forwarded to the neighbour. If an address was already forwarded
to a neighbour it is not retransmitted again.
An attacker can make a list of potential IP addresses of clients (say
an IP range of an ISP, or listen for address
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:33 PM, Ivan Pustogarov wrote:
> The attack I'm trying to address is described here:
> https://www.cryptolux.org/index.php/Bitcoin
> It was discussed here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=632124.0
>
> It uses the following observation. Each NATed client connects t
The attack I'm trying to address is described here:
https://www.cryptolux.org/index.php/Bitcoin
It was discussed here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=632124.0
It uses the following observation. Each NATed client connects to the Bitcoin
network
through 8 entry peers; he also advertises h
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Ivan Pustogarov
wrote:
> the same for a long time, an attacker which does not have any peers at all
> but just listens the Bitcoin network can link together differed BC addresses
> and learn the IP of the client.
I don't understand what you're talking about here;
Yes, I agree that if a client rotates its outbound connections then
sooner or later he will connect to a malicious peer. This case considers
an attacker which has some peers in the network. E.g. renting 500 IP addresses
for 0.01 USD per IP per hour will cost 3600 USD per month: doable but
still not
Yes, I believe peer rotation is useful, but not for privacy - just for
improving the network's internal knowledge.
I haven't looked at the implementation yet, but how I imagined it would be
every X minutes you attempt a new outgoing connection, even if you're
already at the outbound limit. Then, i
>
> Connection rotation would be fine for improving a node's knoweldge
> about available peers and making the network stronger against
> partitioning.
>
It's also the first/next step towards decentralising the DNS seeds (for SPV
clients), as it'd allow each node to explore the network and return b
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 9:46 AM, Ivan Pustogarov wrote:
> Hi there,
> I'd like to start a discussion on periodic rotation of outbound connections.
> E.g. every 2-10 minutes an outbound connections is dropped and replaced
> by a new one.
Connection rotation would be fine for improving a node's kno
Simply by observing timing from sufficiently geo-graphically and
network-ly dispersed nodes, you may deduce the original broadcaster of
a transaction. Rotating peers doesn't help.
That said, periodic rotation can be helpful. Every 2-10 minutes is excessive.
On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Iv
10 matches
Mail list logo
