You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is more blue-sky thinking for now, but a client may want to assess the utxos it's going to be provided in a swap. Doing this without creating a snooping problem is non-trivial, probably impossible ( even cryptographic proof that utxos are not connected, let alone anything else, sounds pretty hard!), except: servers could be assessed on reputation; in some models clients might be, too.
What kind of utxos does the client want in its new history? Fresh ones obviously are desirable; perhaps mixed ones (from coinjoins - hence joinmarket) are better than ordinary-looking ones (which blockchain analysts may have flagged). Or perhaps the opposite.
Slightly comic thought is that a client may end up getting utxos that are actually strongly correlated with those it already has, defeating (partially) the point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This is more blue-sky thinking for now, but a client may want to assess the utxos it's going to be provided in a swap. Doing this without creating a snooping problem is non-trivial, probably impossible ( even cryptographic proof that utxos are not connected, let alone anything else, sounds pretty hard!), except: servers could be assessed on reputation; in some models clients might be, too.
What kind of utxos does the client want in its new history? Fresh ones obviously are desirable; perhaps mixed ones (from coinjoins - hence joinmarket) are better than ordinary-looking ones (which blockchain analysts may have flagged). Or perhaps the opposite.
Slightly comic thought is that a client may end up getting utxos that are actually strongly correlated with those it already has, defeating (partially) the point.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: