Author: Troy Benjegerdes 2014-08-23 17:50:38
Published on: 2014-08-23T17:50:38+00:00
The conversation in the context revolves around the idea of encryption and the need to fix packet size and timing issues. Jeff Garzik argues that encryption is of little value if one can deduce information by observing packet sizes and timings. However, instead of discussing whether this aspect is a reason to not encrypt, the obvious solution is to fix it as well. The solution is to pad the encrypted packets with random bytes and add random bias to their timing. Justus Ranvier adds that the packet size and timing issue will become less of an issue as the network grows. He explains that one transaction inserted into a 3 transaction-per-second encrypted stream is more obvious than the same transaction inserted into a 100 or 1000 TPS stream. The discussion leads to the requirement for anonymity and privacy, which requires lawyers and a Bitlicense. It is suggested that if someone wants privacy and anonymity, they should do high-frequency trading on a centralized exchange, run some arbitrage bots and hide in the millions of transactions per second that go on. But it is important to get a Bitlicense and have a good securities lawyer. In conclusion, trying to solve legal/legislative/social problems with more crypto is only going to benefit those who created the problem in the first place. They can hire a hacker who will find a misplaced (} in the crypto code, and all the work done to encrypt wire protocols becomes silently worthless.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T02:14:19.872060+00:00