[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Cryptography] reliable broadcast channel



On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 4:29 PM <jamesd AT echeque.com> wrote:
>
> On 2020-11-09 13:32, Sid Spry wrote:
> > The example of check kiting is a bad one -- the solution is probably
> > to view the "unauthorized credit" (double spend) as either
> > inconsequential or impossible.
>
> In correspondence banking and the lightning network, a transaction has
> many participants, and consists of many bilateral transactions.
>
> Bob sends money to intermediary one, who sends it to intermediary two,
> who send it to intermediary three, who sends it to the intended
> beneficiary, Carol, and Bobs gets proof of receipt by Carol, completing
> the circle.
>
> We want all bilateral transactions in the circle to complete, or no
> bilateral transactions in the circle to complete.  Insider check kiting
> is that the circle fails in such a way that some people's transactions
> complete, and other people's transactions do not, and a large cloud of
> fog is manufactured over whose transactions completed and whose did not.

I get confused a lot, but my understanding is that the Lightning
network is _designed_ to make that not happen via constraints all the
participants control, or somesuch.  I'm curious what you know that
leads you to believe otherwise.

You should be aware that a blockchain is considered a reliable
broadcast channel, with one single reality, after a number of
confirmations have gone by.

Not everyone is aware of this, to use it for what it would help with.
_______________________________________________
The cryptography mailing list
cryptography AT metzdowd.com
https://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography