|
Example BTA Transactions
Bob sends Alice 10 coins
1. Bob's p2p client application (or web interface) requests home-virtual-server-001 (Bob's home account server) to send Alice 10 bitcoins.
2. home-virtual-server-001 (on physical p2p-server-001) submits order to queue then sends pickup notification to p2p network.
3. Physical p2p-server-002 listener service receives pickup notification and forwards to P2P Application Stack (on the same server).
4. The application stacked BTA-virtual-server-002 (on physical p2p-server-002 (separate physical p2p server for security purposes)) receives the request for pickup from the listener service and then adds home-virtual-server-001 to pickup route list.
5. BTA-virtual-server-002 then routes through the p2p network picking up all of the orders from the home-virtual-servers in the pickup route list. Bob's request is picked up as well.
6. BTA-virtual-server-002 adds bob's request to the BTA Tier-I exchange database for processing.
(KEEP REFRESHING... WILL BE FINISHED IN A FEW MINUTES)
|
|
|
|
|
(BTA Order Book Continued:)
7. Service Confirmation
8. Service Confirmation (delivery)
9. User Message
10. User Confirmation
11. POS (Point of Sale) Confirmation
12. Warrantee Contract
13. Insurance Contract
14. Insurance Payment/Request/Invoice
15. Auto Payment
16. Auto Payment Contract/Confirmation
17. Payroll Transaction (Scheduled Auto Payment)
18. Time Tracking (Employee Clock-In/Out)
19. Time Tracking (Legal Work Start/Stop)
20. Help Desk (Open/Close Ticket)
21. etc...
BTA can be used for a whole host of things besides exchanging cryptocurrency[/b
(MORE TO COME IN A FEW MINUTES)]
|
|
|
|
P2P BTA (Bus.Train.Airplane) Order Book Design and Configuration SuggestionsOrderbook Order Types:1. POS Payment Request 2. POS Escrow Request 3. Sell Order 4. Buy Order 5. User to User Payment/Request/Invoice 6. User to User/POS (Point of Sale) Escrow Payment/Request/Invoice: See this thread here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208327.0How about an p2p escrow ledger with a Point of Sale Passcode.
For example lets say I am on my way to Walmart.
1. I tell my altcoin client to reserve 20 coins for walmarts use with a time limit of 24 hours.
2. I then reserve the amount using walmarts public key to reserve the amount in my wallet.
3. the altcoin network will remove the coins from my wallet and put them in escrow.
4. the coins cannot be sent to anyone or spent by anyone who does not have walmarts private key.
5. I goto walmart and spend 10 coins.
6. Walmart altcoin client sees that there is a reserve amount of 20 coins with walmarts public key signature.
7. Walmart then receives 10 coins from the reserve and using its private key releases the rest of the coins back into my wallet freeing up the remaining 10 coins for me to spend.
This is just an idea on how to speed up transactions.
Let me know what you think.
You can also incorporate a passcode into step 2. that way if Walmart is part of a group of retailers sharing the same private key then I can keep a larger amount in p2p escrow for use with multiple retailers. the only retailers that could take money out would be those that I am present in with my passcode ready. The system could also be used for e-bay and the postal delivery service: 1. a seller on e-bay want to sell you a mining rig for 100 altcoins 1. e-bay seller gives you his public key 2. You reserve into escrow 100 altcoins using the public keys of the e-bay seller, e-bay, and UPS delivery service. The altcoin client removes the 100 altcoins from your wallet and puts them into the cloud secured by the public keys of the e-bay seller, e-bay, and the UPS delivery service. 3. Upon completion of the sale ebay signs the transaction with their private key. 4. Upon delivery and inspection of the mining rig the UPS delivery man signs the transaction with his private key. 5. When all the transaction has been signed by all of the private keys (matching the public keys already incorporated into the transaction) the 100 altcoins are transferred to the e-bay seller. anyone else have input? [UPDATE] I created and announced a project post for this idea here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=208393.0The above solution could also be used like a giftcard. Simply by using the merchants public key you can load coins to be used at that merchant or group of merchants using parent and sub-keys.
A merchant would not have to do confirmations at all because they could look directly into their key-wallet and see the funds are already there before you even arrive at the location. They would not be able to spend the funds without your pass-code.
1. Bob sends Alice 100 coins using Alice's public key. Altcoin client removes 100 coins from Bob's wallet. Altcoin client sets 24 hour time limit on transaction. Passcode must be entered into transaction before time limit or funds get returned. Altcoin client sends coins to the Cloud secured by Alice's public key. Bob cannot retrieve funds until after time limit expires.
2. Alice receives coins in key wallet and verifies coins with private key.
3. Alice cannot spend coins without bobs pass-code.
4. Bob meets Alice in person and inspects merchandise.
5. Bob sees merchandise is good and gives Alice pass-code to unlock coins.
6. If merchandise is bad Bob does not give Alice pass-code and the funds are returned to Bob's wallet when the 24 hour time limit expires.
7. 8. (MORE TO COME IN A FEW MINUTES)
|
|
|
|
Also I didn't understand why banks need multiple wallet.dat files for the same type of coin. Let's see. How do I explain this? The system should set a static amount of wallet.dat files per wallet bank. This has advantages such as portability (moving the wallet files to other P2P servers in the case of seizure or DDoS attacks) among other advantages. Also virtual servers are going to be like brand names or website names. "Home-Virtual-Server-002" will be "Home-Virtual-Server-002" forever on the P2P network. It MUST be that way. If you have an account on Home-Virtual-Server-002 its like banking at Chase or Citibank. There are Citibank branches everywhere but only one Citibank Corporation. The wallet banks should be named after the Home-virtual-server to whom they belong for easy identification purposes: wallet.hvs-002.bank-001 (hvs-002 is short for "Home-Virtual-Server-002". The P2P network admin would see that this particular wallet belonged to Home-Virtual-Server-002. Another reason for multiple wallet files is that you don't want authorities being able to map user accounts to wallet files. It makes it harder to seize. When you evenly distribute the coin across the wallet files its like RAID 5 striping but for cryptocurrency instead of hard-drives. It keeps everything consolidated to the Home-Virtual-Server. The P2P transactions can be done through the P2P BTA exchange orderbook. Home-Vitual-Server-002 can then send the coins to wherever BTA orderbook says they need to go. |
|
|
|
Still the one who manages the key is the weak point. He could lose them, or abuse the power. It suffers from the same problem as any centralized trust-based system. We have already seen cases when exchanges proved not trustworthy, they lose or steal their clients' funds regularly, because there's no legal persecution and they don't care much.
Also I didn't understand why banks need multiple wallet.dat files for the same type of coin.
There are way to mitigate this. Let's get real here. You HAVE to trust someone. You and I use keys everyday and we know absolutely nothing about the maintainers of those keys. Do you trust the server admin at your banking institution where you perform your SSL online transactions? The purpose of the P2P network is to stop government shutdowns/seizures and ddos attacks. You still have to trust the P2P key admin ("mayor" of the P2P network) not to steal your money (but I am working on a way to make it really difficult for him to do so). Server admins should have no way to defraud you or steal your coins. Only the "Mayor" of the P2P network would have the power to do so. Most likey the "Mayor" would be a well know person like Gavin or Coblee. If they use the keys to steal everyone's money then you have my permission to hunt them down. The trust model could be reputation based. A site like Wikileaks stake their operation on public trust. If no one trusted Wikileaks then would anyone read the reports that they edit and release? Maybe, but I don't believe so. Is there some risk? Yes, but no more than that which already exists in the current model of secure online transactions. It should also be possible to code into the system a way to remove your account to another P2P network. |
|
|
|
For me, the difficult part in an exchange is exchanging Fiat for crypto. This appears to only address trading crypto for other types of crypto with the role of exchanging fiat still left to legacy, centralised exchanges (albeit now connected to this P2P network) such as MtGox.
These centralised exchanges are still just as likely to be ddosed and so you have exactly the same problem you always did. Unless I'm missing something?
Cheers, Paul.
Like I said in another post, converting fiat is not a technical problem, it is a political problem. At the risk of changing the subject of this thread we need to let the Libertarian revolution continue on to deal with those issues. DDos attacks don't work against the 1 million+ MoneyGram and Western Union locations that could be used to upload money to the P2P network or Fiat converting sites. Fiat conversions are a political problem. Period. |
|
|
|
The "city" could also trust its citizens. The server could offload work to clients to perform some P2P tasks as well helping to secure and further decentralize the network. All keys however would be under control of the trusted "mayor".
This can only work as there would have to be multiple network "cities" in the case one network "city" was attacked or compromised. Users could still function using other trusted cities. Users also should be able to move their accounts from one network "city" to another (even under attack).
Home-virtual-servers should not only have the ability to move from one P2P server to another. They should be able to move accounts as well (in the case of a ddos attack against a server because of a particular user).
The home-virtual-server could start moving accounts to other random home-virtual-servers.
If the virtual-server under attack is unable to function because of the attack then another P2P server monitoring the attack could deactivate the home-virtual-server and reallocate the accounts on the attacked home-virtual-server to other virtual-servers for mitigation purposes. It should be possible to move the accounts to other trusted P2P networks as well.
For example: If under attack Wikileaks P2P exchange network could start moving virtual-home-server accounts and wallet-banks to Anonymous P2P exchange network and vice-versa.
(MORE TO COME LATER)
Attack and DDOS escrow agreements built into the exchange could also be made between Wikileaks and Anonymous in the cases of wallet-bank transfers. |
|
|
|
|
The "city" could also trust its citizens. The server could offload work to clients to perform some P2P tasks as well helping to secure and further decentralize the network. All keys however would be under control of the trusted "mayor".
This can only work as there would have to be multiple network "cities" in the case one network "city" was attacked or compromised. Users could still function using other trusted cities. Users also should be able to move their accounts from one network "city" to another (even under attack).
Home-virtual-servers should not only have the ability to move from one P2P server to another. They should be able to move accounts as well (in the case of a ddos attack against a server because of a particular user).
The home-virtual-server could start moving accounts to other random home-virtual-servers.
If the virtual-server under attack is unable to function because of the attack then another P2P server monitoring the attack could deactivate the home-virtual-server and reallocate the accounts on the attacked home-virtual-server to other virtual-servers for mitigation purposes. It should be possible to move the accounts to other trusted P2P networks as well.
For example: If under attack Wikileaks P2P exchange network could start moving virtual-home-server accounts and wallet-banks to Anonymous P2P exchange network and vice-versa.
(MORE TO COME LATER)
|
|
|
|
The wallet files are internally encrypted where? The use of the term "P2P" (Peer to peer) implies that all nodes (users) have access to the database.
If the users (who are also servers) do not have access to the wallet files, why are they stored at all?
Did you read the whole entry? It is a P2P Server that uses an application stack. Users do not have access to the wallet files. The users use accounts on the server. When you access gmail or yahoo mail do you have access to their internal processes? It's a client-server model (but could be programmed to be web-based - i.e wordpress, cms, etc...). Ideally The users would have accounts on the servers. If a user and his friends downloaded the server portion of the open source software then he could start his own P2P exchange network. He would have to generate/import his own certificates and keys to make sure that rogue servers from other users don't talk to his network. And he would have to secure the LAMP server to make sure none of the users accounts on his server would have access to his wallet banks. If he wanted to connect to and interact with other trusted P2P networks then he would have to implement a P2P "bridge-server-node" which I will write about later. A bridge-server-node would allow other fiat converting sites (like btc-e, mtgox) to exchange fiat for cryptocurrency. Those sites would have to be trusted and and have certificates and keys implemented to transact with the P2P network. Do you honestly believe that users would create accounts and send money to a P2P network with no trust model built in? Even bitcoin can only trust other bitcoin clients. Bitcoin clients do not talk to Litecoin clients. They only trust bitcoin. Similarly the P2P network you setup would only trust those that are part of your P2P network. For example wikileaks could start a P2P exchange network that users all over the world could use. The people that setup accounts and send money would trust the founder of wikileaks with their money. But Wikileaks could have a bridge-server-node setup to transact with the P2P network that Piratebay has setup or Anonymous, or perhaps Mega's Do you understand now? If I use the analogy about the city bus that I posted earlier then think of the city buses as servers and the drivers of those buses as keys. The only ones who could drive the buses would be those who were given keys by the city. If anyone else tried to drive one of their buses, they would not be able to simply because they do not have the keys to the bus. If they tried to use their own bus and go from bus stop to bus stop trying to pick up people none of the people would get on their bus because most people know what a city bus looks like (city logo, etc..) plus the police would pull them over if they tried to. Each P2P network would be its own self contained city. The people of that city would trust the mayor and city council of that city. In addition, the city could transact with other cities that they trusted (if they chose to do so). The citizens of that city could choose to transact with other cities that they trusted as well.I hope this help everyone to understand. I apologize for not being clearer. (MORE TO COME LATER)The bridge-server-nodes are P2P as well. Just so that there is no single point of failure. It is possible to make an end-user client or website that can access multiple P2P networks simultaneously. This would not diminish network security in the least bit. Each P2P network would remain secure. |
|
|
|
The wallet files are internally encrypted where? The use of the term "P2P" (Peer to peer) implies that all nodes (users) have access to the database.
If the users (who are also servers) do not have access to the wallet files, why are they stored at all?
Did you read the whole entry? It is a P2P Server that uses an application stack. Users do not have access to the wallet files. The users use accounts on the server. When you access gmail or yahoo mail do you have access to their internal processes? It's a client-server model (but could be programmed to be web-based - i.e wordpress, cms, etc...). Ideally The users would have accounts on the servers. If a user and his friends downloaded the server portion of the open source software then he could start his own P2P exchange network. He would have to generate/import his own certificates and keys to make sure that rogue servers from other users don't talk to his network. And he would have to secure the LAMP server to make sure none of the users accounts on his server would have access to his wallet banks. If he wanted to connect to and interact with other trusted P2P networks then he would have to implement a P2P "bridge-server-node" which I will write about later. A bridge-server-node would allow other fiat converting sites (like btc-e, mtgox) to exchange fiat for cryptocurrency. Those sites would have to be trusted and and have certificates and keys implemented to transact with the P2P network. Do you honestly believe that users would create accounts and send money to a P2P network with no trust model built in? Even bitcoin can only trust other bitcoin clients. Bitcoin clients do not talk to Litecoin clients. They only trust bitcoin. Similarly the P2P network you setup would only trust those that are part of your P2P network. For example wikileaks could start a P2P exchange network that users all over the world could use. The people that setup accounts and send money would trust the founder of wikileaks with their money. But Wikileaks could have a bridge-server-node setup to transact with the P2P network that Piratebay has setup or Anonymous, or perhaps Mega's Do you understand now? If I use the analogy about the city bus that I posted earlier then think of the city buses as servers and the drivers of those buses as keys. The only ones who could drive the buses would be those who were given keys by the city. If anyone else tried to drive one of their buses, they would not be able to simply because they do not have the keys to the bus. If they tried to use their own bus and go from bus stop to bus stop trying to pick up people none of the people would get on their bus because most people know what a city bus looks like (city logo, etc..) plus the police would pull them over if they tried to. Each P2P network would be its own self contained city. The people of that city would trust the mayor and city council of that city. In addition, the city could transact with other cities that they trusted (if they chose to do so). The citizens of that city could choose to transact with other cities that they trusted as well.I hope this help everyone to understand. I apologize for not being clearer. (MORE TO COME LATER) |
|
|
|
|
I doubt the Chinese government is opposed to cryptocurrency technology.
Everyone know that the Chinese have been trying to remove the U.S dollar as the worlds reserve currency for years. They see Bitcoin as a way to do that.
Further, Chinese state-run television just had a 30 minute special on bitcoin and cryptocurrencies just a few weeks ago introducing the Chinese people to crypto. If the government was opposed to crypto they would have never allowed the broadcast.
|
|
|
|
USSC Litecoin-P2P-Server - A Decentralized P2P Client-Server Application & Exchange For Fast Transactions That Utilize Any Cryptocurrency
Application Features:
...
7. Double spend attacks are mitigated by denying end-users access to wallet.dat files or banks. [Wallet.dat files are internally encrypted].
.....
DRM Does not, and can never work. Assume the distributed database is public. What are you talking about? Its a P2P application stack. You don't let the users have access to the wallet files. |
|
|
|
Very interesting indeed. The only problem with the BTA approach I think is the fact that a criminal could set up a rogue bus service that would collect people and then convince individuals that they either don't need a new spouse, or supply them with a dummy that they cannot distinguish from a real human being, and then kill a random woman on the bus. In other words, this idea is not completely secure and tamper proof in its current form. I started a similar thread here, which is based on the concept that for person A to receive currency C from person B, without any chance of keeping C, he would have to create a transaction T for an echanged currency C2 to person B, and only the id of T could then be used as a key (somehow) to validate the original payment from B to A. But it's a chicken-and-egg type of problem, and solving that in a way that is close to the bitcoin "blockchain" way of thinking is beyond my feeble comprehension unfortunately. There are however some good ideas in the thread I linked to. Maybe they can be of use to you. -Michael You use certificates and keys to secure the server nodes. A rogue node could not transact with any of the P2P server nodes. |
|
|
|
If I had an Alien fleet of ships with ships that were 100 miles wide, I was invading the earth, and I had 100 nuclear warheads headed straight for me. What kind of computer technology do you think I would I be using? Peer-to-Peer (P2P) that's what. All I would need is a 2'x4' piece of my ship left intact in order to keep and maintain flight control, life support, and weapons systems online. Bombs don't work against P2P networks...If aliens decided to invade earth We would be decimated. Why? Because all of our technology is centralized and thus obsolete. P2P is the future of ALL computing!For an example P2P application stack click here (P2P exchange application stack example): https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=209269.0
|
|
|
|
|
We control Crypto. The government controls their money that they print. Its their money dude.
Is it not written "render unto Caesar what is Caesar's".
Its Caesar's money dude; but, its our crypto.
|
|
|
|
|
That's why I said earlier "we need to just let the political Libertarian revolution continue".
Other than that there is really nothing else we can do.
In the meanwhile, we CAN focus on innovation; because innovation is what got us here in the first place.
What if Satoshi said "well I don't know how to convert fiat into bitcoin so I wont focus on developing or coding software for the bitcoin software".
Come-on, man. Get real dude!
|
|
|
|
|
Fiat conversions ARE a political problem. Maybe you will realize that when the Department of Homeland Security shows up at your door.
Hey buddy, if you think that the whole world is going to use BTC and no other cryptocurrency then you are in "LaLa" land. Please join the rest of us in reality.
|
|
|
|
To answer the original question: I have designed a system for a P2P decentralized orderbook: I have created a system for a P2P orderbook here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=209269.0I figured out how to make a P2P Orderbook for a decentralized exchange: I am updating the post daily but will add more in a few minutes: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=209269.0Decentralized Orderbook - BTA System (Bus - Train - Plane)
BTA - Bus. Train. Plane. BTA is a concept I came up with the solve the problem of a decentralized orderbook for P2P systems.
BTA is a system to move orders from Tier I exchange nodes to Tier II exchange nodes to Tier III exchange nodes according to a predetermined cycle.
BTA is a system akin to a mass-transit public transportation system.
example:
In a mass transit system you could have a bus that would route and cycle through a city with 25 bus stops, stopping at every stop to pick up people. The bus would then drop all of the people off at the last stop which for the purposes of this demonstration is the city's train station. The bus would then repeat the cycle continuously bringing more and more people to the train station.
Eventually the train would arrive to that city and pick up the people who got off the bus and are waiting at the train station. The train would then continue on and cycle through all of the cities of that particular province/state picking up people (who were dropped off by the bus) at every city train station. At the end of the train route would be an airport with a planes ready to pick people up and take them to a specific destination. The train would cycle continuously through all of the cities picking up people and dropping them off at the airport.
The people who were first on the bus and then on the train and now at the airport would then board the plane (jumbo jet if you will) and travel on the plane from the province/state they were in to a final location all the while making stops in every major province/state of that country to pick up additional people. After the plane arrived at the final location it would take off again and cycle through all the provinces/states of the country continuously picking up and dropping off people.
Now, imagine if you will a dating and match making service on one of the sides of that county that has a big convention to help people find a spouse. That service decides to utilizes the same aforementioned mass transportation system to bring people together from all over the country.
People would leave their homes and go to the bus stop. Some people would find compatible matches for themselves at the bus stop or while riding on the bus. Those people would get off the bus pay the fee and then go home with no need to go to to the convention. Those people have what they want; a spouse.
The rest of the people would continue on to the train station and get on the train. But again some people would find matches on the train and at the station; so, they too would pay the fee and go home. They have what they want; a spouse.
What remains of the people would continue on to the airport then get on the plane to go to the convention hoping to find a good match for a spouse.
A P2P BTA (Bus-Train-Airplane) exchange would operate the same way only picking up orders instead of people.
(More in a few minutes)
More here in a few minutes: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=209269.0Here is how it works:P2P BTA Application
How does it work?
In a P2P BTA system a "Bus" exchange node would cycle through and collect orders from P2P "home-server" nodes mentioned in the above posts. "Home-server" nodes house user accounts and wallets in a P2P network.
1. The Bus exchange server node would collect orders from home-server nodes 1 through 25 (for example).
2. Matching orders (if any) are fulfilled in a mini exchange. Receipts are generated. All unfulfilled orders and receipts are then stored for pickup by an "Train" exchange node.
3. On a predetermined cycle the higher Train exchange node would pick up all of the unfulfilled orders and receipts from all four (for example) of the Bus exchange nodes in the P2P network. All matching orders are fulfilled in a medium sized exchange and more receipts are generated. Again, All unfulfilled orders and collected receipts are then stored for pickup by an "Airplane" exchange node.
4. Finally, on a predetermined cycle the higher Airplane exchange node would pick up all of the unfulfilled orders and receipts from all four (for example) of the Train exchange nodes in the P2P network. The Airplane exchange is the highest exchange on our example P2P network. All orders would attempt to be fulfilled here. Collected receipts are used to generate reports and to display fulfilled orders.
In our example P2P network, if no orders were fulfilled by the Bus or Train exchange nodes then the Airplane exchange node would have picked up 400 orders.
(MORE TO COME LATER TODAY)
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=209269.0 |
|
|
|
|
Like the Russian BTC-e, does your site fully support English and Chinese?
Also, just some advice: Get a better domain name. rmbtb is not good to remember. How about cnc-e.com or chn-e.com or chn-direct.com or cnc-trade.com
One more thing. Post this in the alternative currency sub-forum and the main bitcoin forum. That's where it needs to be.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
