This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.
The original was posted on /r/monero by /u/samdane7777 on 2024-04-30 16:05:42.
Original Title: This affects most p2p infrastructure on the internet, Monero would still work, but very very little else. Language involved in numerous bills & proposals is extremely unpromising, Coincenter agrees that FOSS criminal indemnity is at stake.
Ugh reddit is just such an unhelpful difficult site to write anything on to compared to twitter, it ruined my formatting.
This post is about describing *all* of the p2p infrastructure used for DeFi on bitcoin and ethereum and siacoin to explain node network archtecture. I want you all to read and understand the network traffic involved and understand that no component of this is custodial, because that is what the DoJ is claiming about Tornado and Samura*, and that is what* the Treasury and IRS are claiming about Uniswap, the language in the two indictments, and the other two agency Proposals is clearly an attack on criminal indemnity for FOSS, they are using criminal enforcement as regulation, in the words of CoinCenter, to get what they want by vastly expanding the definition of server in federal court. This is outright perjury, and I want the monero community to understand the network traffic architecture involved in IPFS and layer 2 solutions on bitcoin in particular with regard to Samurai's coordination server, so you understand this is in fact perjury that is be planned by federal prosecutors.
The Whirlpool coordinator is a blinded server that critically can't know the contents of the massages it passes. Users collaboratively make self-transfers. Samourai never accepted nor transferred bitcoin & they aren't money transmitters, similar to SWIFT:
While SWIFT’s tools are often used to move substantial amounts of money in violation of sanctions, and while SWIFT voluntarily cooperates with ongoing investigations into the use of their messaging protocol for sanctions evasion,24 they are, nonetheless, at pains to stress that they are not an obligated entity under sanctions laws: Responsibility for ensuring that individual financial transactions comply with sanctions laws … rests with the financial institutions handling them, and their competent authorities. Swift is only a messaging service provider and has no involvement in or control over the underlying financial transactions that are mentioned by its financial institutional customers in their messages.25 SWIFT has, in fact, far more control over the messages that they relay than the Tornado Cash developers have over any Tornado Cash messages. Unlike the Tornado Cash protocol, SWIFT
The questions you've raised touch on some innovative ideas about how Layer 2 solutions on the Bitcoin network, such as Mercury or similar technologies, could potentially evolve to become more decentralized using technologies like Distributed Hash Tables (DHT) and InterPlanetary File System (IPFS). Let's address each concept step by step.
- Blind Signing Delegated to Client-Side Nodes ===============================================
Transferring the responsibility of blind signing to client-side nodes instead of a centralized backend server could increase decentralization. This would involve a shift from a single signing authority to a distributed network of nodes, each capable of performing signing operations. This setup could potentially enhance security and trustlessness by eliminating single points of failure. However, this approach would require robust mechanisms to ensure that these nodes operate reliably and securely without compromising the private keys used for signing.