Published on: 2015-01-06T11:03:47+00:00
Peter Todd proposed a "proof-of-publication" system using OP_RETURN to embed opaque data in transactions, but faced criticism from Adam Back regarding its effectiveness. While establishing "proof-of-publication" as a universal primitive is significant, it alone does not provide sufficient indexing, validation, or exclusion capabilities. The effectiveness of this system and the number of supporters other than Peter Todd remain uncertain.In a discussion on blockchain design, the author explored layer properties such as time-stamping and namespace for constructing a decentralized PoW-chain based ecash system. Time-stamping creates an immutable stream of data with a time-ordering, while namespace adds uniqueness and first-come first-served property. The author concluded that finding improvements in the consensus critical code was challenging. Namespace attributes hold information like public keys, IP addresses, and email addresses. Proof of publication is crucial for miners to have copies of all committed data before building on top of blocks. There is a meta-incentive for bitcoin holders to help others catch up with the history, and information needs to be broadcasted due to numerous miners and full-nodes. The anti-relay term refers to the system level, and attacking the insertion logic is prevented to maintain the integrity of the merkle tree.Peter Todd shared a note about using a "proof-of-publication" system for implementing an "anti-replay" system. However, Todd argued that proof-of-(non)-publication is different from anti-replay and suggested extending the definition of proof-of-(non)-publication. He emphasized the importance of indexes and validation in cryptocurrency designs. While proof-of-(non)-publication is significant, Bitcoin also provides indexing and validation/exclusion functionalities.Various perspectives on the advantages and disadvantages of proof-of-publication markets are discussed in an email exchange. The concept of proof-of-publication allows for tradeoffs and options in connecting sellers and buyers, providing accurate price information. The term "fair" is subjective, making it challenging to define precisely. Some argue that p2p markets can exist without proof of publication, and there are other secure models beyond this concept. Third-parties may republish bids and offers to achieve better price discovery.Jorge Timón explains the advantages of proof-of-publication systems in trade scenarios. He gives an example where a seller wants to sell a unit of A for 100 units of B, and a buyer is willing to pay up to 200 Bs for 1 A. In a proof-of-publication system, the execution price is determined based on bids and asks. However, in the real world, buyers and sellers want to ensure they are connected to actual counterparts and are willing to pay a premium for that. Proof-of-publication allows for different mediums and options to meet users' needs.Paul Snow and Peter Todd discuss the relationship between anti-replay systems and proof-of-publication. Anti-replay systems prevent data repetition but do not provide information about ownership or possession. On the other hand, the blockchain can prove that a message is in the blockchain, and anyone possessing the blockchain possesses the message. They clarify that anti-replay systems are mathematical models and can be implemented in various ways.Mark Friedenbach suggests the possibility of decentralized exchanges using vanilla bitcoin if the protocol supported multiple validated assets. Peter Todd argues that non-proof-of-publication orders are insecure due to sybil attacks. They discuss an example where Alice wants to sell A for B, and Bob is willing to pay more. In a proof-of-publication system, the execution price would be fair for both parties. However, in native assets and sighash_single, miners could exploit the system, leading to unfair execution.In a discussion about new primitives, Adam Back and Peter Todd debate the security implications. Todd suggests using a trusted third party for security, while Back proposes alternative methods. They discuss the risk of sybil attacks and the implementation of double-spending punishment.Paul Snow and Peter Todd discuss the difference between anti-replay systems and proof-of-publication systems. Anti-replay prevents data repetition, while proof-of-publication proves that a message has been published without revealing its content. They clarify that the blockchain can be used to prove message presence and ownership.Peter Todd discusses the limitations of anti-replay for proof-of-publication. Anti-replay cannot determine who possesses a specific message, while proof-of-publication allows repeated entries and leaves interpretation to observers. He suggests testing publishability in an anti-replay system without actual publishing. Overall, anti-replay is insufficient for implementing proof-of-publication uses.In a discussion about decentralized exchanges, Mark Friedenbach suggests the possibility of using vanilla bitcoin with extensions for market participants to use a wider class of orders. Peter Todd argues that such orders are either based on proof-of-publication or insecure due to sybil attacks.
Updated on: 2023-08-01T11:01:08.003228+00:00