<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Phillip Hallam-Baker <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:phill@hallambaker.com" target="_blank">phill@hallambaker.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="gmail-">On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 5:21 AM, Georgi Guninski <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:guninski@guninski.com" target="_blank">guninski@guninski.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">If your bitcoin wallet is compromised, all your bitcoins are gone<br>
forever. With a credit card, you have some chance of only minor<br>
damage. If your computer is owned, your wallet is at risk.<br>
<br>
This appears major problem for the widespread adoption of bitcoin<br>
IMHO.<br></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div><div style="font-size:small">Since a vast proportion of the market cap of BitCoin has been stolen at some point, clearly it isn't a bar to whatever it is Bitcoin it adopted for. It does disqualify it as a payment transfer system.</div></div><span class="gmail-"><div><br></div></span></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Bitcoin is disqualified as a payment transfer system because it's fungible? Does not compute. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="gmail-"><div></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Fixing it appears to contradict decentralization, which opens another<br>
can of "worms".<br></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div><div style="font-size:small">Here is the central problem with BitCoin. Proponents wave away all objections claiming that cryptocurrencies are in their infancy and these will be solved. What they refuse to acknowledge is that every solution to these problems that has shown to work in practice requires the introduction of the trusted third parties and intermediaries and regulation that they claim to have made obsolete.</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div><div style="font-size:small">Its like taking the alternator off your car and showing it will still start, it just won't run for very long without tons of batteries and that therefore the alternator was never necessary because someone will find a solution that doesn't need such big batteries. Of course such a solution already existed and was known - the alternator.</div><div style="font-size:small"><br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Second layer solutions such as Lightning Network do not require the introduction of trusted third parties. <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrr_zPmEiME">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rrr_zPmEiME</a> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div style="font-size:small"></div></div><span class="gmail-"><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Potential approach is to use "trusted wallet proxy", but this may not<br>
work in practice.<br>
<br>
Are these concerns taken seriously?<br></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div><div style="font-size:small">Not by enthusiasts. </div><br></div><span class="gmail-"><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Any technical attempts at mitigating cryptocurrency theft?<br></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div><div style="font-size:small">None that I can see.</div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div>I'm surprised that no one has mentioned Mosen-Eyal-Sirer style covenants. <a href="http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/02/29/bitcoin-vaults/">http://hackingdistributed.com/2016/02/29/bitcoin-vaults/</a></div><div><br></div><div><a href="http://fc16.ifca.ai/bitcoin/papers/MES16.pdf">http://fc16.ifca.ai/bitcoin/papers/MES16.pdf</a><br></div><div><br></div><div>Last I recall, they had been implemented in the Elements Project <a href="https://blockstream.com/2016/11/02/covenants-in-elements-alpha.html">https://blockstream.com/2016/11/02/covenants-in-elements-alpha.html</a></div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote"><div></div><div> </div></div></div></div>
<br>______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
The cryptography mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:cryptography@metzdowd.com">cryptography@metzdowd.com</a><br>
<a href="http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.metzdowd.com/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/cryptography</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>