Re: [therightkey] DNSNMC deprecates Certificate Authorities and fixes HTTPS security

Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com> Mon, 16 December 2013 22:13 UTC

Return-Path: <contact@taoeffect.com>
X-Original-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C42B41AD7C5 for <therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:13:09 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.334
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.334 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n2dbOwc60543 for <therightkey@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:13:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a6.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcbbj.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.119]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9D6C1A1F62 for <therightkey@ietf.org>; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:13:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a6.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a6.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5073E598077; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:13:07 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=taoeffect.com; h= content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :message-id:references:to; s=taoeffect.com; bh=eG5qo034RmwFqgOyY 9KYFnKIvJQ=; b=Hzq66mSba7vU8ysVZzYNbTo+SSuJxVrERTASIBV4qsNRKmu9J ko4KDG2cXJ8jpOi82aupzPlY3GbVBHZliM6pCqdoD+4NSoP+uLO+2CrweGGPG3zw WZFsWeeYizNvwI0GYoZQY1CmTWPJWf/bMaJtVjNqExsbqgUR+/wmAebcqI=
Received: from [192.168.2.3] (ip98-180-48-204.ga.at.cox.net [98.180.48.204]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: contact@taoeffect.com) by homiemail-a6.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8ABA6598074; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 14:13:05 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_E57C1B49-6C40-4453-9A76-CBD4236A9B5C"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha512
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.0 \(1822\))
From: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABrd9SShenVv4wm06kut+sXQRzHQoZezajLbGc_HZnu_4jwxrg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 17:12:59 -0500
Message-Id: <AD2594AC-CA6B-4314-A521-5C15E1C13F86@taoeffect.com>
References: <22429D73-4EFC-4091-8F5B-BAD38968EA54@taoeffect.com> <CABrd9SQebG0+DpnD0GXD8nOXa2FSSKp8LLbBO+q1PxAEJ6dQcw@mail.gmail.com> <596BD192-F19E-48A5-8FD7-37D5A2085751@taoeffect.com> <CABrd9SShenVv4wm06kut+sXQRzHQoZezajLbGc_HZnu_4jwxrg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ben Laurie <benl@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1822)
Cc: "therightkey@ietf.org" <therightkey@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [therightkey] DNSNMC deprecates Certificate Authorities and fixes HTTPS security
X-BeenThere: therightkey@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: <therightkey.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/therightkey>, <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/therightkey/>
List-Post: <mailto:therightkey@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey>, <mailto:therightkey-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 22:13:10 -0000

On Dec 16, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> wrote:

> Fun though it is to debate the merits of bitcoin, the question at hand
> is whether we should form a WG.
> 
> If you want to propose a bitcoin based protocol, go right ahead.

Though this thread is more of an announcement, it can also be considered a first draft of a proposal for DNSNMC.

Paper was linked to in the first post, here it is again:

http://okturtles.com/other/dnsnmc_okturtles_overview.pdf

> My difficulties with bitcoin as a whole are on record.

OK... and so are the replies to your paper.

> P.S. I think you're criticising a different paper. For example, this
> one doesn't even mention IP addresses.

What are you mentioning then? What does this paragraph refer to, if not IP addresses?

Next we have to agree who should get the coin. This is not particularly hard. First we use efficient unbounded agreement to number the current participants11 sequentially. We then use it to agree a consensus random number. This could be done, for example, by agreeing a commitment for each participant, and then revealing the value they committed to, adding them all together and taking the modulo of that total, which would randomly designate a participant.

Cheers,
Greg

--
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.

On Dec 16, 2013, at 5:00 PM, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> wrote:

> On 16 December 2013 21:31, Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com> wrote:
>> Hey Ben,
>> 
>> On Dec 14, 2013, at 2:12 PM, Ben Laurie <benl@google.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Decentralized: there is no central authority controlling all the names
>> 
>> 
>> If it is based on bitcoin, that is untrue. Or even if not. See
>> http://www.links.org/files/decentralised-currencies.pdf.
>> 
>> 
>> Thank you for the link to this paper.
>> 
>> I needed to find the time to actually read this and get back to you. I've
>> now done this.
>> 
>> You've posted this reply to a number of lists that we're both subscribed to,
>> so I'm going to send this reply to each one:
> 
> Fun though it is to debate the merits of bitcoin, the question at hand
> is whether we should form a WG.
> 
> If you want to propose a bitcoin based protocol, go right ahead.
> 
> My difficulties with bitcoin as a whole are on record. I may have more
> to say about a specific I-D.
> 
> P.S. I think you're criticising a different paper. For example, this
> one doesn't even mention IP addresses.
> _______________________________________________
> therightkey mailing list
> therightkey@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/therightkey