Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
So I must ask the question: what is the rational for a bitcoin node to be hidden? ie to use RDV points like hidden services? For me the rational for bitcoin is to anonymize communications between nodes and/or clients, typically who sent this tx, not to hide that you are operating a bitcoin node, then back to what I sent earlier I tried to find the explaination in the bitcoin docs before sending this post but did not find any, except referring to the fact that bitcoin communications should be anonymized, which does not need RDV points Another question is why to mimic the Tor network for RDV points with .onion addresses? The answers might be "this is what exists and we have no other way to do it", I am proposing another way I will not repeat what I wrote before, but I am operating node-Tor nodes inside the Tor network since ~10 years, the js implementation of the Tor protocol had not been easy (as well as putting everything inside browsers) but I consider that the most difficult had been to handle all unexpected events that happen inside the Tor network, even after selecting carefully the nodes and testing them, this is a mess, nodes are coming in, going out, responding, not responding, responding correcltly or all of a sudden responding shxtty stuff, I was even considering to get the entropy for the js prng from all of those unexpected events I don't think that any other people except the Tor project team know this, a good example is http://peersm.com/peersm2, see the logs (destroy and destroy and destroy) and how long it takes to establish 6 circuits knowing that our server is the first one in the path (eliminating one dubious node among 3) I am not "promoting" this, everything is open source now and it is made to be used, and I think that my proposal has some interest, using the Tor network for bitcoin is a very bad idea, for security and performances reasons Le 18/11/2019 à 17:44, Carl Dong via bitcoin-dev a écrit : > Hi Mr. Lee Chiffre, > > I have been working on an implementation of addrv2 (BIP-155). Is this what > you meant by I2P and Torv3 address support? > > My WIP pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16748 > Merged BIP: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0155.mediawiki > Ongoing discussion: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/766 > Note: Even though the pull request to the BIP repo is merged, we’re still > discussing some details in the pull request thread and will amend the BIP > once it seems like we’ve worked out all the kinks > > Review and further discussion is very much welcome! :-) > > Cheers, > Carl Dong > cont...@carldong.me > "I fight for the users" > >> On Nov 16, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev >> wrote: >> >> >> Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It >> supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin >> node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at >> bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software >> support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P >> addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer >> addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? >> >> >> -- >> lee.chif...@secmail.pro >> PGP 97F0C3AE985A191DA0556BCAA82529E2025BDE35 >> >> ___ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > > ___ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev -- Move your coins by yourself (browser version): https://peersm.com/wallet Bitcoin transactions made simple: https://github.com/Ayms/bitcoin-transactions Zcash wallets made simple: https://github.com/Ayms/zcash-wallets Bitcoin wallets made simple: https://github.com/Ayms/bitcoin-wallets Get the torrent dynamic blocklist: http://peersm.com/getblocklist Check the 10 M passwords list: http://peersm.com/findmyass Anti-spies and private torrents, dynamic blocklist: http://torrent-live.org Peersm : http://www.peersm.com torrent-live: https://github.com/Ayms/torrent-live node-Tor : https://www.github.com/Ayms/node-Tor GitHub : https://www.github.com/Ayms ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
Hi Mr. Lee Chiffre, I have been working on an implementation of addrv2 (BIP-155). Is this what you meant by I2P and Torv3 address support? My WIP pull request: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16748 Merged BIP: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0155.mediawiki Ongoing discussion: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/766 Note: Even though the pull request to the BIP repo is merged, we’re still discussing some details in the pull request thread and will amend the BIP once it seems like we’ve worked out all the kinks Review and further discussion is very much welcome! :-) Cheers, Carl Dong cont...@carldong.me "I fight for the users" > On Nov 16, 2019, at 11:33 PM, Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > > > Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It > supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin > node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at > bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software > support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P > addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer > addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? > > > -- > lee.chif...@secmail.pro > PGP 97F0C3AE985A191DA0556BCAA82529E2025BDE35 > > ___ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
The Tor team encourages active participating Tor nodes, preferably exit/ middle/guard nodes and not only client nodes, which is actually a significant part of the reason that the documentation I put together in Bitcoin.SE does not deal much with configuration tweaking Tor; as out of the box Tor participates actively in the Tor network. As for applications other than web browsing, i is simply not true to suggest that Tor is implemented solely for web browsing and I suppose that this view has come about because of the Tor browser, an attempt to engage more active Tor nodes while providing an OOB privacy solution to simplify setup for the not-so-technical. As just one example of other uses, you will note the Tor configuration item `LongLivedPorts` and its implications. No, it is completely not necessary to tweak this option for Bitcoin although you may. I encourage you to forward these comments to the Tor mailing list. >I really don't think that the Tor network is designed and adapted to support >bitcoin nodes, using it for something else than browsing is just a workaround >and I would be surprised that the Tor project team contradicts this and/or >encourage this use Regards, LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH From: bitcoin-dev on behalf of Aymeric Vitte via bitcoin-dev Sent: Monday, 18 November 2019 10:59 PM To: Matt Corallo ; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion ; Mr. Lee Chiffre Cc: fontaineden...@googlemail.com Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services As I briefly sketched here before I think that a better long term solution would be to link the bitcoin traffic with something like node-Tor (https://github.com/Ayms/node-Tor) Much more light (the whole code not minified is only ~1MB), not using tons of libraries prone to security/maintenance issues, easy to use/configure/maintain and you don't need the (heavy/complicate) onions RDV concepts and addresses, which in addition is useless for bitcoin As simple as a duplex stream bitcoin.pipe(node-Tor) inside servers or browsers (difficult to imagine full nodes and the blocks inside browsers but why not one day, so for light clients probably implementing part of the bitcoin protocol like https://peersm.com/wallet, for now it's a standalone offline webapp but of course it would be interesting to connect it in a secure way to bitcoin nodes to retrieve info from the utxo set and send txs for example since it's not obvious for users to create their txs in its current form) This would be a separate network using the Tor protocol over TCP, WebSockets and WebRTC, making it possible also for browsers to relay the traffic, probably the nodes discovery (to get the keys) could be linked to the bitcoin peer discovery system (we just have to add the onion key to the peer profile, and maybe long term id key), anyway that's simple to setup, and probably for a p2p network 2 hops will be enough I really don't think that the Tor network is designed and adapted to support bitcoin nodes, using it for something else than browsing is just a workaround and I would be surprised that the Tor project team contradicts this and/or encourage this use Le 18/11/2019 à 00:42, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev a écrit : There is effort ongoing to upgrade the Bitcoin P2P protocol to support other address types, including onion v3. There are various posts on this ML under the title “addrv2”. Further review and contributions to that effort is, as always, welcome. On Nov 17, 2019, at 00:05, Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? -- lee.chif...@secmail.pro<mailto:lee.chif...@secmail.pro> PGP 97F0C3AE985A191DA0556BCAA82529E2025BDE35 ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org<mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
As I briefly sketched here before I think that a better long term solution would be to link the bitcoin traffic with something like node-Tor (https://github.com/Ayms/node-Tor) Much more light (the whole code not minified is only ~1MB), not using tons of libraries prone to security/maintenance issues, easy to use/configure/maintain and you don't need the (heavy/complicate) onions RDV concepts and addresses, which in addition is useless for bitcoin As simple as a duplex stream *bitcoin.pipe(node-Tor)* inside servers or browsers (difficult to imagine full nodes and the blocks inside browsers but why not one day, so for light clients probably implementing part of the bitcoin protocol like https://peersm.com/wallet, for now it's a standalone offline webapp but of course it would be interesting to connect it in a secure way to bitcoin nodes to retrieve info from the utxo set and send txs for example since it's not obvious for users to create their txs in its current form) This would be a separate network using the Tor protocol over TCP, WebSockets and WebRTC, making it possible also for browsers to relay the traffic, probably the nodes discovery (to get the keys) could be linked to the bitcoin peer discovery system (we just have to add the onion key to the peer profile, and maybe long term id key), anyway that's simple to setup, and probably for a p2p network 2 hops will be enough I really don't think that the Tor network is designed and adapted to support bitcoin nodes, using it for something else than browsing is just a workaround and I would be surprised that the Tor project team contradicts this and/or encourage this use Le 18/11/2019 à 00:42, Matt Corallo via bitcoin-dev a écrit : > There is effort ongoing to upgrade the Bitcoin P2P protocol to support other > address types, including onion v3. There are various posts on this ML under > the title “addrv2”. Further review and contributions to that effort is, as > always, welcome. > >> On Nov 17, 2019, at 00:05, Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev >> wrote: >> >> Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It >> supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin >> node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at >> bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software >> support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P >> addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer >> addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? >> >> >> -- >> lee.chif...@secmail.pro >> PGP 97F0C3AE985A191DA0556BCAA82529E2025BDE35 >> >> ___ >> bitcoin-dev mailing list >> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org >> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > ___ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
There is effort ongoing to upgrade the Bitcoin P2P protocol to support other address types, including onion v3. There are various posts on this ML under the title “addrv2”. Further review and contributions to that effort is, as always, welcome. > On Nov 17, 2019, at 00:05, Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev > wrote: > > Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It > supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin > node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at > bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software > support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P > addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer > addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? > > > -- > lee.chif...@secmail.pro > PGP 97F0C3AE985A191DA0556BCAA82529E2025BDE35 > > ___ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
Blockchain Commons is using v3 tor authentication for remote clients controlling a full node created using our Bitcoin Standup project (currently only macOS but more platforms coming): https://github.com/BlockchainCommons/Bitcoin-Standup Docs at: https://github.com/BlockchainCommons/Bitcoin-Standup#tor-v3-authentication-using-standup-and-fullynoded Video demonstrating securing remote connection of a full node to the iOS wallet Fully Noded: https://youtu.be/pSm2VftTCBI More details on v3 authentication at: https://github.com/AnarchoTechNYC/meta/wiki/Connecting-to-an-authenticated-Onion-service#connecting-to-authenticated-version-3-onion-services — Christopher Allen ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
For those perhaps not so well versed in the operation of Bitcoin (and Bitcoin Core) with Tor, connectivity through the outgoing connection to other nodes is all accomplished via the socks5 proxy which enables all current gossip and the distribution of the nodes own transactions to other nodes. This is a full connectivity feature. For listening, Bitcoin Core instructs Tor to create an ephemeral hidden service which, depending on the various factors, may be currently v2 only or v3 (future implementation). This is not necessary for the functionality of node connectivity in any way and is only used to allow for hidden listening so that other nodes connecting out on the onion can connect privately without hopping on the public internet at all and without exposing the nodes public IP or ports as listening (no port forwarding required and no listing on nodes list with public IP). It is currently possible for many nodes to exist as onion only nodes. For the time being, although I did wonder myself, the use of v3 ephemeral service is not a requirement of operation on Bitcoin and hardly adds anything to security especially if we enable transient onion listening (a feature proposal is currently waiting for consideration/approval on bitcoin-core-dev and GitHub), however, eventually it will be essential to make use of the v3 ephemeral service as the v2 service support will, as I understand, eventually be dropped from the Tor network. I do not know if there are any current distinct plans. My opinion is, v3 support is a nice idea but hardly urgent yet. Good luck if it ends up with an ack as I suspect some of the changes required will be complex and this may be perhaps the best reason to begin on it while there is interest. Regards, LORD HIS EXCELLENCY JAMES HRMH From: bitcoin-dev on behalf of s7r via bitcoin-dev Sent: Monday, 18 November 2019 2:35 AM To: Mr. Lee Chiffre ; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It > supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin > node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at > bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software > support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P > addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer > addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? > > Hello, Yes, that is correct. Currently at present moment only v2 onion services are supported. Bitcoin Core is limited at 128 bit 'addresses' in the p2p protocol, so it requires a rework of the p2p protocol. v3 onion services are whole ed25519 public keys, base32 encoded with .onion at the end. Same reason applies to I2P 'address types' as well. However, I am not an expert in I2P and don't actually know how many bitcoin full nodes might exist in I2P. See: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9214 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/2091 For the default `ADD_ONION` feature, the onion service key was downgraded to explicitly RSA1024 (legacy, v2 onion services) to ensure the feature still works out of the box: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9234 If you want a Tor only full node, you are best to use v2 onion services for now. Why do you need the bitcoin node to explicitly have a v3 onion address? You can have a service that is accessible to the general public as a v3 onion service, and in the back uses a bitcoin full node that uses v2 onion service to talk to other nodes. The v2 onion service bitcoin network is extended fairly. You can use in the same torrc (Tor configuration file), implicitly same Tor process/daemon simultaneously v2 and v3 onion services by setting HiddenServiceVersion parameter after every HiddenServiceDir parameter. ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
Re: [bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
Mr. Lee Chiffre via bitcoin-dev wrote: > Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It > supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin > node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at > bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software > support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P > addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer > addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? > > Hello, Yes, that is correct. Currently at present moment only v2 onion services are supported. Bitcoin Core is limited at 128 bit 'addresses' in the p2p protocol, so it requires a rework of the p2p protocol. v3 onion services are whole ed25519 public keys, base32 encoded with .onion at the end. Same reason applies to I2P 'address types' as well. However, I am not an expert in I2P and don't actually know how many bitcoin full nodes might exist in I2P. See: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/9214 https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/2091 For the default `ADD_ONION` feature, the onion service key was downgraded to explicitly RSA1024 (legacy, v2 onion services) to ensure the feature still works out of the box: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9234 If you want a Tor only full node, you are best to use v2 onion services for now. Why do you need the bitcoin node to explicitly have a v3 onion address? You can have a service that is accessible to the general public as a v3 onion service, and in the back uses a bitcoin full node that uses v2 onion service to talk to other nodes. The v2 onion service bitcoin network is extended fairly. You can use in the same torrc (Tor configuration file), implicitly same Tor process/daemon simultaneously v2 and v3 onion services by setting HiddenServiceVersion parameter after every HiddenServiceDir parameter. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
[bitcoin-dev] v3 onion services
Right now bitcoin client core supports use of tor hidden service. It supports v2 hidden service. I am in progress of creating a new bitcoin node which will use v3 hidden service instead of v2. I am looking at bitcoin core and btcd to use. Do any of these or current node software support the v3 onion addresses for the node address? What about I2P addresses? If not what will it take to get it to support the longer addresses that is used by i2p and tor v3? -- lee.chif...@secmail.pro PGP 97F0C3AE985A191DA0556BCAA82529E2025BDE35 ___ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
