• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols pg6
 

Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols pg6

on

  • 1,000 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,000
Views on SlideShare
1,000
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols pg6 Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols pg6 Document Transcript

    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Bitcoin Forum March 18, 2014, 10:34:07 PM Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Forever Login with username, password and session length News: Bitcoin 0.8.6 is now available. Download.       HOME   HELP SEARCH DONATE LOGIN REGISTER   Bitcoin Forum > Bitcoin > Development & Technical Discussion (Moderator: gmaxwell) > Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  All « previous topic next topic » print Author Topic: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols  (Read 11936 times) Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 01:51:02 AM  #101 TheButterZone Hero Member Activity: 616 Nemo me impune lacessit Ignore Quote from: aric on March 24, 2013, 09:34:14 PM This is one of the first posts that makes me think twice about being on the bitcoin bandwagon to the extent I've been. The thought of cashing out some bitcoins even crossed my mind. It crossed my mind. That's all I'm saying. I continue to be skeptically optimistic and mindful. This. At this point, I'd really only want to know if I'm receiving stolen coins. I'm not sure how to implement this, other than some sort of insurance/revocation program. "If you want to ensure your stolen bitcoins may be returned, 1) use a monitor that alerts via email, SMS, or other electronic method, on withdrawals from each address 2) sign messages of 'stolen key' with your private keys containing BTC and keep paper backups of the signatures 3) input the signatures to our system as soon as they are stolen from. We will blast an alert to all participating clients that any BTC detected to be sent from your keys within {a certain period of time just before inputting the signatures} should be suspected stolen." I'm not that familiar with it, but it seems sort of like a PGP revocation certificate. Obviously there are some more details to work out, such as confirming identity of the original keyholder for returning their BTC safely, but I think it would deter crime, be pro- victim, and still maintain liberty. Much like concealed weapons under the clothes of law- abiders deter violent criminals because they don't know who is armed, the thieves would have to fear that they are dealing with a participating client who will see a red flag pop up when they receive the stolen BTC, and hold the coins for return to the victim rather than receive any benefit. The only way for thieves to get around this would be to immediately mix the coins at a service they know they won't be red-flagged at, or hope the reaction time of the revoker is slow, so they can benefit before then. ???O? ????! I sell stuff for BTC here here and here | Flute & Violin & Piano For Sale | Voiceover for BTC | Copy editing for BTC gpg_identity=http://pgp.thebutterzone.com | WoT feedback here & eBay feedback here | BM- Forever Login Search
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Private Internet Access™ - No logs, Unlimited Bandwidth, PC Magazine's Editor's Choice Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here. Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 05:09:22 AM  #102 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 05:29:11 AM  #103 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 07:14:22 AM  #104 2cWNzWbQcWeFUGvuXz7K8kknJVWrZtYvGz mughat Jr. Member Activity: 37 Ignore I think it is helpfull to think of Gold in this discussion. Guld used in chrims is still just gold. No reason to blacklist it or burn it in hell. Chriminals should be delt with in court not in the money transfer system. mokahless Sr. Member Activity: 449 Ignore Quote from: mughat on March 25, 2013, 05:09:22 AM I think it is helpfull to think of Gold in this discussion. Guld used in chrims is still just gold. No reason to blacklist it or burn it in hell. Chriminals should be delt with in court not in the money transfer system. This. And on that note, let's let this thread die. 1PHejcsNgdhotraheE9eupnopBT8UFzDpY Bitcoin is decentralized.  Why isn't your mining pool? p2pool: Decentralized mining since 2012 whitenight639 Full Member Activity: 154 Ignore Mike did you go and meet the CIA with Gavin, is this your brief, to see what the consensus is on this idea? So many problems with this for a start you underestimate the size of the black market, if this was implemented every 3rd coin would be tainted thereby reducing spendable coins in the "normal economy", Also you propose that anybody can lodge an addition to the blacklist with an acusation of fraud and the owner of these coins has no idea, sounds like flight lists, one should have the right to face his his accuser or at least know he has been accused! Also this whole system would enforce guilt by association, If i live next door to Osama
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 11:13:43 AM  #105 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 12:38:24 PM  #106 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 12:41:08 PM  #107 Bin Ladin and he seems like a pleasant guy so i do a small job for him and then I can't spend my money and have law enforcement after me. Money is an exchange of labour or goods, I do not want my sweat going to waste because of some do-gooder- Statist-sheeple didn't like the guy I bought my bitcoins off. Money should be neutral, nobody wants to know that the paper fiat they got given in change from the corner shop was used by some pedo, or hooker, some things we do not want to know. 125uWc197UW5kM659m4uwEakxoNHzMKzwz Blowfeld Jr. Member Activity: 53 Ignore Mike, did you say DMCA was "balanced"?  As are all laws written by industry. In the present design, trackability and fungibility are more or less the same.  Trackability and fungibility are (or should be) distinct properties and the discussions should be independent. I'm sorry, Mike, but this thread demonstrates quite clearly that Bitcoin is the most Orwellian currency in the history of mankind.  (Trackability) Without fungibility, I think Bitcoin is doomed.  Rather than spending time figuring out how to ruin Bitcoin, effort should be spent on how to adapt Bitcoin (or another cryptocurrency) to be completely fungible. 1BLowmewTGDsLYEAbvenZCcEnLJzwuFssX zebedee Donator Sr. Member Activity: 430 Ignore Quote from: Mike Hearn on March 24, 2013, 10:01:48 PM hazek, please read the first post in this thread all the way through. It has an entire section on the definition of crime. And it should be clear that it's an optional layer on top. Actually I thought you would quite like it, it's a rather libertarian way to handle (the proceeds of) crime as the whole thing is more or less market based and government is not a special player. Agreed, I quite like it.  It's amazing and disappointing how many people apparently lack reading comprehension, or the ability to understand an argument with a bit of subtlety to it. Particularly when they've already had to make such steps in accepting bitcoin anyway. Thanks for the informative and interesting post Mike. phelix Hero Member
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 01:07:49 PM  #108 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 01:19:56 PM  #109 Activity: 1078 nmc:id/phelix Ignore This whole discussion shows one thing: Bitcoin is not safe because it is not anonymous enough. We will have to find ways to make it resistant to control or come up with a better solution altogether. [BPS] Bitcoin Project of the Season: Winter 2014 - Winner: BitWasp EasyWinBuilder - build your own Bitcoin-Qt namecoin.info - namecoind sendtoalias phelix 1.00 blockchained com ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ ¦ d'aniel Sr. Member Activity: 461 Ignore Quote from: Blowfeld on March 25, 2013, 11:13:43 AM I'm sorry, Mike, but this thread demonstrates quite clearly that Bitcoin is the most Orwellian currency in the history of mankind.  (Trackability) Without fungibility, I think Bitcoin is doomed.  Rather than spending time figuring out how to ruin Bitcoin, effort should be spent on how to adapt Bitcoin (or another cryptocurrency) to be completely fungible. Whoa, ease off on the hyperbole.  I don't think you're giving our modern fiat currencies nearly enough credit (especially where physical cash will be phased out).  For example, how do you freeze an account under this proposal?  Can you still keep the existence of bitcoins you own secret?  Is (worldwide) coin mixing still a (potential) option when necessary?  Are anonymous, off-blockchain transactions still a (potential) option? I also think you're underestimating how much serious coordination among all the governments of the world it would take to force a non-voluntary, repressive version of this that's actually effective.  This is not to say a voluntarily used version couldn't be effective - or at least more effective than the current tracking systems in place, whatever that's saying.  But it would at least be harder to abuse, and police would have to actually make phone calls and knock on doors, rather than simply scrape a database without any meaningful consent. And all the while, as adoption spreads, the human component of the network expands, along with awareness of monetary privacy issues and the political capital required to actually resist, rather than simply hide from, such abuses of power.  I believe people would be much more willing to make a fuss about something that affects them directly, like being enlisted as spies to their fellow citizens, than the current situation where they never actually see the abuse of privacy.  I also believe more aware people will be more willing to adopt better solutions as they may arise. caveden Hero Member Activity: 1078 As many others here, I'm very uneasy with the possibility of Bitcoin losing fungibility. But anyway, this is undeniable: Quote from: d'aniel on March 24, 2013, 07:53:33 PM like it or not, Bitcoin's architecture easily permits this, regardless of Mike's opinion about it.
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 25, 2013, 02:04:09 PM  #110 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 26, 2013, 05:08:03 AM  #111 Ignore It's perfectly possible to implement such thing. It's actually possible to implement much nastier things (think of a government-mandated whitelist). Mike Hearn has a point when he says that, in the event of a government trying to impose its regulation, the usage of a totally voluntary and decentralized system like this is preferable. But, should we be "compromising in advance"? Wouldn't that be "negotiating against ourselves"? Governments can do much worse than killing Bitcoin fungibility. The problem, as always, are governments themselves, not this voluntary system Mike is proposing. Perhaps we should focus on implementing p2p, anonymous mixing services. Such mixing systems would be essential to keep the "market-based checks-and-balances" Mike describes in OP, if such system ever comes to existence. 18rZYyWcafwD86xvLrfuxWG5xEMMWUtVkL d'aniel Sr. Member Activity: 461 Ignore Quote from: caveden on March 25, 2013, 01:19:56 PM As many others here, I'm very uneasy with the possibility of Bitcoin losing fungibility. But anyway, this is undeniable: Quote from: d'aniel on March 24, 2013, 07:53:33 PM like it or not, Bitcoin's architecture easily permits this, regardless of Mike's opinion about it. It's perfectly possible to implement such thing. It's actually possible to implement much nastier things (think of a government-mandated whitelist). Mike Hearn has a point when he says that, in the event of a government trying to impose its regulation, the usage of a totally voluntary and decentralized system like this is preferable. But, should we be "compromising in advance"? Wouldn't that be "negotiating against ourselves"? Governments can do much worse than killing Bitcoin fungibility. The problem, as always, are governments themselves, not this voluntary system Mike is proposing. Perhaps we should focus on implementing p2p, anonymous mixing services. Such mixing systems would be essential to keep the "market-based checks-and-balances" Mike describes in OP, if such system ever comes to existence. If I didn't think my blacklist providers or their investigators were abusing their authority, then I'd participate in this, and I probably wouldn't even feel like I was "compromising" in doing so.  If it proved effective, then I'd continue to participate.  At the very least it shows a good faith effort by the community, and helps build political capital.  And maybe it even helps to track down some legitimately shitty people. behindtext Member Activity: 107 operating blacklists for tainted coins is an exercise in futility. i understand that mike and others want to "play ball" with the authorities and give them similar abilities to what
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 26, 2013, 10:29:38 AM  #112 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 27, 2013, 06:28:14 PM  #113 Ignore they currently have to stave off negative regulatory action. my immediate response to this push for self-regulation is that LE needs to do their own damn homework. the inventor(s) of bitcoin clearly put a lot of thought and work into the system in an attempt to empower the individual at the expense of the state. if the state wants to clamp down on nefarious activity on bitcoin, they can dig through the public tx ledger like anyone else. the idea of blacklisting currency because it was misused is as stupid as sitting in a bank for 3 hours to open an account. Coinvoice: Invoice in USD, get paid in BTC btcd: an alternative full-node bitcoin implementation hashman Hero Member Activity: 679 Ignore Thanks for sharing thought process with us.  However this is not the way to go about fighting crime, whatever that might mean to you.  No matter how fancy your money is, if people are mentally ill, children abused, adults sexually repressed, people put into top-heavy power roles with no checks, facism not avoided, mental illnesses allowed to spread from generation to generation, and inefficient and short-sited resource division is continued, we all know what the result will be.  More crime.  Freezing peoples money isn't going to do shit apart from getting the people who control the freezing to be tempted to join the corruption.    TL/DR:  Regulatory Capture.  The people who run the blacklists WILL become the people doing whatever it is you are trying to stop.  Murphant Jr. Member Activity: 34 Ignore This whitelist/blacklist approach to criminality linked bitcoins seems very interesting due to its decentralized aspect, at least in theory. I find the Spamhaus analogy to be quite appropriate. While I am uncertain of the overall efficiency of AML laws in our societies, I agree that some compromise will probably have to be done eventually. However, the loss of fungibility still makes me uneasy. Would it be easy/free to get a coin whitelisted? I believe the hassle of tainted coins not being accepted or causing a delay in a restaurant might be excessive. A more reasonable option would be if the restaurant accepting the payment without a word and then reporting the event to the appropriate authorities if they deem it necessary. Thus regular users really wouldn't care if their coin was tainted or not, and enterprises would not want to discriminate for fear of driving away consumers with tainted coins. The downside I see is that enterprises would have no real incentive to do appropriate reporting other than being good citizens, and I believe that mandatory reporting would be against the spirit of Bitcoin although this might end up being what happens. Sadly, it seems to me that this whole proposal would be made useless by the use of mixers. Bad guy Bob could simply use a mixer and be done with it, having received fresh coins. Some mixers, centralized or decentralized, could adopt as a policy to only accept untainted coins, but then that might incentivize some mixers to accept tainted coins and change a higher fee. While I would think that most people who use these tainted mixers
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 27, 2013, 06:54:01 PM  #114 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 27, 2013, 07:48:55 PM  #115 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 27, 2013, 08:55:35 PM  #116 would have something to hide (otherwise why pay the extra fee and received possibly tainted bitcoins?), these mixers would still provide plausible deniability for the origin of the coins. This would make the whole proposal useless. I also believe in the necessity of mixers for the anonymity of Bitcoin and I wouldn't want them banned if that were even possible. In any case, I believe that the Bitcoin community needs to address these concerns and discuss them instead of doing witch hunts for statist pawns. Mike's proposal might not be perfect both for technical and ideological reasons, but the community needs to seriously consider what is going to happen when governments around the world start making laws. caveden Hero Member Activity: 1078 Ignore Quote from: Murphant on March 27, 2013, 06:28:14 PM While I would think that most people who use these tainted mixers would have something to hide (otherwise why pay the extra fee and received possibly tainted bitcoins?), these mixers would still provide plausible deniability for the origin of the coins. If the majority of coins being mixed are tainted, you would still get tainted coins out. True, that should make it difficult to discover which particular taint applies to you, but tainting only should never be enough to criminalize anybody anyway. The whole idea, if I got it right, was to help law enforcement to find criminals. What I'm saying is that the coins getting out of this "blacklisted mixers" would still sound some alarms... 18rZYyWcafwD86xvLrfuxWG5xEMMWUtVkL Murphant Jr. Member Activity: 34 Ignore Quote from: caveden on March 27, 2013, 06:54:01 PM What I'm saying is that the coins getting out of this "blacklisted mixers" would still sound some alarms... Yes, it will sound some alarm, but whoever is receiving these tainted coins does not know, by design of the mixer, who sent them these coins. They have an address since the transaction is visible in the blockchain, but they may not know anything about whom that address belongs to.From a law enforcement perspective, the trail dies. In this case, is there anyone that benefits from the knowledge that these coins are "tainted"? Edit: quote formatting caveden Hero Member Activity: 1078 It seems you made some mistakes with your quotes there... Answering your question: If mixers end up segregated among "blacklisted" and "non- blacklisted", somebody receiving coins coming out of "mostly blacklisted mixers" would be able to: Know the coins have a high degree of blacklisted taint
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 28, 2013, 03:36:48 PM  #117 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols March 28, 2013, 04:03:03 PM  #118 Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols  #119 Ignore Know the coins likely got through some mixer (that's visible) These two things might lead people to believe that those coins might be hiding something. That alone is not enough to prosecute anybody (at least not in places where the most basic justice principles are still respected, like innocent until proven guilty), but it might give some tips. 18rZYyWcafwD86xvLrfuxWG5xEMMWUtVkL Murphant Jr. Member Activity: 34 Ignore Quote from: caveden on March 27, 2013, 08:55:35 PM These two things might lead people to believe that those coins might be hiding something. [...] it might give some tips. Indeed, anyone can see that the coins might be hiding something: that is why they are tainted.  One point I didn't mention is that the coins might be recognized as tainted only after a mixing or after a transaction. Just imagine Bob steals some bitcoins and quickly uses a mixer, tainted or untainted. After an hour or so, the coins are reported stolen and whoever got them in the mixing is "stuck" with tainted coins. Now what? The fact that the coins are tainted does not give any "tips" to anyone. People knew that these coins were shady, which is why some entity marked them as tainted in the first place. The only information you gain on the perpetrator is that he used a mixer, which can be seen by observing the blockchain anyways. All this information could have been derived without this whole taint proposal. Thus, in this case, the taint is useless. Peter Todd Hero Member Activity: 700 aka retep Ignore Quote from: Murphant on March 28, 2013, 03:36:48 PM Thus, in this case, the taint is useless. It gets better than that: the tainted coins can be thrown away by spending them to transactions, either obviously in one big high-fee transaction, or as a bunch of low-fee transactions - possibly even as an input to a network security assurance transaction. Now are all coins derived from the coinbase outputs of the blocks in question tainted? It's easy to argue that they should be: miners can easily accept transactions privately with little risk of losing the fees due to an orphan, and large miners can still afford to return the fraction of the transaction corresponding to the hashing power they control even if the transaction is submitted to the network normally. It's already common for money to be laundered through gambling establishments by simply accepting the cut the casino takes as overhead. BTC: 1FCYd7j4CThTMzts78rh6iQJLBRGPW9fWv  PGP: 7FAB114267E4FA04 Murphant Jr. Member
    • Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=157130.100[3/18/2014 3:35:07 PM] March 28, 2013, 04:26:37 PM Re: Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols May 08, 2013, 08:24:28 PM  #120 Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  All print Bitcoin Forum > Bitcoin > Development & Technical Discussion (Moderator: gmaxwell) > Decentralised crime fighting using private set intersection protocols « previous topic next topic »   Jump to: => Development & Technical Discussion   Sponsored by Private Internet Access, a Bitcoin-accepting VPN. Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Activity: 34 Ignore Quote from: retep on March 28, 2013, 04:03:03 PM the tainted coins can be thrown away by spending them to transactions While this is true, it would be hard to launder large amounts of money in that way due to the rather small tx fees at the moment. I understand the analogy with a Casino's profits, but it seems to me that the creation of a block is a rather hefty price to pay for laundering such a sum. Take into account that a miner who is able to mine a bloc and "clean" such shady transactions could instead have cashed in on regular tx fees for other transactions. These regular tx fees not received represent a loss for the miner. Thus, it seems to me that the coins should become clean once they are included in a tx fee simply because it is not efficient for a miner to participate in such a cleaning scheme. Hermel Jr. Member Activity: 48 Bitcoin Association Switzerland - President Ignore Quote from: TheButterZone on March 25, 2013, 01:51:02 AM At this point, I'd really only want to know if I'm receiving stolen coins. And you are not alone. There is a lot of talent and money currently not flowing into the Bitcoin economy due to such concerns. Today, it is the wild west. If you want to make Bitcoin a currency mainstream users feel comfortable with, there must be some possibilities to track down severe criminals. What if Bitcoin becomes the first choice for ransom? After the third time you read a headline like "kidnappers demand 10'000 BTC ransom to release 5-year old Alice", you will start to doubt whether you still want your friends and relatives to think of you as the "bitcoin-guy". What will happen sooner or later is that someone opens a database of stolen Bitcoins. Once it becomes relatively easy to verify whether a Bitcoin was stolen or not, legal pressure will form on exchanges and merchants to not accept them. In most countries, knowingly handling stolen goods is a crime. So step by step, we will get those blacklists in one form or another. And it is better to get them sooner and in a way we can shape - than to passively watch them appear. To conclude: I'm with Mike on this. Residing in Switzerland? Then write me to join the Bitcoin Association Switzerland - the local chapter of the Bitcoin Foundation. => Development & Technical Discussion go