Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 06:19:39 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: use blockchain for proof in court?  (Read 2097 times)
BTC_Bear
B4 Foundation
VIP
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


Best Offense is a Good Defense


View Profile WWW
March 31, 2012, 10:17:28 PM
 #21

@BTC_bear very interesting questions, thought provoking. I'd start with a claim that private keys are secrets and that TX1 and TX2 could only be initiated by a person(s) with knowledge of the keys to sign ... and here are the keys.


Thanx.

 Just pointing out that private keys in no way ties it to a single entity or person even. A person's computer might have been compromised, or even by intent more than one person might have a copy of the private keys. I know of one business entity that does this. In fact, the QT Client does this.

Supposedly there are 3 persons with the ability to send a message to the client. (Gavin, Theymos, and Satoshi) Who sent the recent message to the clients about the security update?
 

Corporations have been enthroned, An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. ~Abe Lincoln 1ApJdWUdSWYw8n8HEATYhHXA9EYoRTy7c4
"If you don't want people to know you're a scumbag then don't be a scumbag." -- margaritahuyan
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481134779
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481134779

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481134779
Reply with quote  #2

1481134779
Report to moderator
1481134779
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481134779

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481134779
Reply with quote  #2

1481134779
Report to moderator
1481134779
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481134779

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481134779
Reply with quote  #2

1481134779
Report to moderator
Yankee (BitInstant)
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078


Charlie 'Van Bitcoin' Shrem


View Profile WWW
March 31, 2012, 10:26:26 PM
 #22


is this implemented anywhere? the paper blows my brains out just by looking at it.

you can use it in the way described in proof of concept, but it burns money. I will implement it in a month or two as part of my thesis, however.

Dude, good job on that. I will include this in my presentation at Future of Money Summit if you dont mind.

commitcoin isn't my idea, to clarify. I'll just do the implementation, since there isn't one yet, as far as I can tell.

Heh, thats just as good. If you can have a working beta within 4 weeks, I'd love to use it in the presentation  Grin

I'll do my best. It's actually pretty straightforward to implement (especially using something like bitcoinj), but there's so much (non-bitcoin related) stuff to be done alongside that... Smiley


Like what, design?

Bitcoin pioneer. An apostle of Satoshi Nakamoto. A crusader for a new, better, tech-driven society. A dreamer.

More about me: http://CharlieShrem.com
vuce
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
March 31, 2012, 10:29:56 PM
 #23


I'll do my best. It's actually pretty straightforward to implement (especially using something like bitcoinj), but there's so much (non-bitcoin related) stuff to be done alongside that... Smiley


Like what, design?

no no, a few other totally unrelated projects.
mila
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462



View Profile
March 31, 2012, 10:35:23 PM
 #24

@BTC_bear very interesting questions, thought provoking. I'd start with a claim that private keys are secrets and that TX1 and TX2 could only be initiated by a person(s) with knowledge of the keys to sign ... and here are the keys.


Thanx.

 Just pointing out that private keys in no way ties it to a single entity or person even. A person's computer might have been compromised, or even by intent more than one person might have a copy of the private keys. I know of one business entity that does this. In fact, the QT Client does this.

Supposedly there are 3 persons with the ability to send a message to the client. (Gavin, Theymos, and Satoshi) Who sent the recent message to the clients about the security update?
 

I posted private keys in semi-public forum to challenge users to grab a bitcoin and then refilled the address to see how fast they notice and grab it again. I have even no idea how many wallets have now that key. but that was intended and I would not use that key to exercise any kind of serious TX (like writing to blockchain for future use in court should be)

the above example of a collective knowledge (especially the keys from bitcoin message function), I assume the key has been changed so Satoshi no longer knows it, unless Gavin and Theymos are married to each other, they should be able to testify against each other. If the key is the same since project inception, then it might be a problem if both deny writing that message and Satoshi would not show up in court.

I have multiple pgp keys and I share some of them willingly and proactively (cyber last will, trusted friends hold copies to settle my affairs in case of brain damage or death) but I still consider them as personal and do all I can to keep them safe and secret. some of the keys have even my name in them : )

your ad here:
BTC_Bear
B4 Foundation
VIP
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


Best Offense is a Good Defense


View Profile WWW
March 31, 2012, 10:51:09 PM
 #25

@BTC_bear very interesting questions, thought provoking. I'd start with a claim that private keys are secrets and that TX1 and TX2 could only be initiated by a person(s) with knowledge of the keys to sign ... and here are the keys.


Thanx.

 Just pointing out that private keys in no way ties it to a single entity or person even. A person's computer might have been compromised, or even by intent more than one person might have a copy of the private keys. I know of one business entity that does this. In fact, the QT Client does this.

Supposedly there are 3 persons with the ability to send a message to the client. (Gavin, Theymos, and Satoshi) Who sent the recent message to the clients about the security update?
 

I posted private keys in semi-public forum to challenge users to grab a bitcoin and then refilled the address to see how fast they notice and grab it again. I have even no idea how many wallets have now that key. but that was intended and I would not use that key to exercise any kind of serious TX (like writing to blockchain for future use in court should be)

the above example of a collective knowledge (especially the keys from bitcoin message function), I assume the key has been changed so Satoshi no longer knows it, unless Gavin and Theymos are married to each other, they should be able to testify against each other. If the key is the same since project inception, then it might be a problem if both deny writing that message and Satoshi would not show up in court.

I have multiple pgp keys and I share some of them willingly and proactively (cyber last will, trusted friends hold copies to settle my affairs in case of brain damage or death) but I still consider them as personal and do all I can to keep them safe and secret. some of the keys have even my name in them : )



Then I think we agree that it is a bad idea to try to use it in court. As one can foresee the Prosecution telling the Jury only the defendant could send the money/msg. Then 'someone' else uses a copy of the wallet/private key to send money/msg and destroy the prosecution's case.



Corporations have been enthroned, An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. ~Abe Lincoln 1ApJdWUdSWYw8n8HEATYhHXA9EYoRTy7c4
mila
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462



View Profile
March 31, 2012, 11:11:30 PM
 #26

Can I put a hash of a photo into the blockchain and use it later in court to prove that particular photo was taken before time x?

I posted private keys in semi-public forum to challenge users to grab a bitcoin and then refilled the address to see how fast they notice and grab it again. I have even no idea how many wallets have now that key. but that was intended and I would not use that key to exercise any kind of serious TX (like writing to blockchain for future use in court should be)

Then I think we agree that it is a bad idea to try to use it in court. As one can foresee the Prosecution telling the Jury only the defendant could send the money/msg. Then 'someone' else uses a copy of the wallet/private key to send money/msg and destroy the prosecution's case.

I'm willing to further discuss and finally probably also to agree that an indisputable link between a person and a transaction can not be established (issues with copies, backups, ...).
But (and I quote OP here) I would continue to argue that a hash of a digital file (a photo in this case) can be found in the blockchain and also that it can be proven when it has been included in the blockchain.

Why it's there, who's benefit it is I don't discuss. Just the fact that it's there and when it was included. Would the link between the file and it's fingerprint in blockchain stand?

edit: but my initial argument in this tread, you disproved it

your ad here:
kjj
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1302



View Profile
March 31, 2012, 11:20:31 PM
 #27

I'm willing to further discuss and finally probably also to agree that an indisputable link between a person and a transaction can not be established (issues with copies, backups, ...).
But (and I quote OP here) I would continue to argue that a hash of a digital file (a photo in this case) can be found in the blockchain and also that it can be proven when it has been included in the blockchain.

Why it's there, who's benefit it is I don't discuss. Just the fact that it's there and when it was included. Would the link between the file and it's fingerprint in blockchain stand?

Exactly right.

Unless one or more of the major functions used by bitcoin is seriously broken, then the existence of the hash in the block chain would easily and convincingly prove that the document existed prior to the timestamp on the block (more or less) and that it has not been modified since then.

It could still have been modified prior to being hashed, and it could have existed for a long time prior to being included, and anyone in the world could have posted it.  But it existed, in that form, at that time, and you can prove it.

p2pcoin: a USB/CD/PXE p2pool miner - 1N8ZXx2cuMzqBYSK72X4DAy1UdDbZQNPLf - todo
I routinely ignore posters with paid advertising in their sigs.  You should too.
BTC_Bear
B4 Foundation
VIP
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 364


Best Offense is a Good Defense


View Profile WWW
March 31, 2012, 11:25:41 PM
 #28

Quote
Why it's there, who's benefit it is I don't discuss. Would the link between the file and it's fingerprint in blockchain stand?

Forgoing the former as that is back to intent and purpose, the latter can be done within a mathematical certainty if the chain is verified as being correct. (The actual current chain in use and not an alt or forked chain) Even without timestamps, the blocks occur approximately every 10 min on average so one could give an approximate time frame with only the time of the first block being confirmed.


btw: Files have been encoded into the blockchain. But with time, no encoding would be necessary as the data will be there. One could just write a program to pick out the data necessary to create a file.  Simple example: Rather than encode 'Hello World', just find an ascii equivalent in the chain and point the reader to those addresses to decode. Hence, someone else unintentionally encoded the message, the reader just picks the right address to produce the desired message/file. Granted this is easier for simple messages and very difficult for harder messages or images but possible.

IMO



Corporations have been enthroned, An era of corruption in high places will follow and the money power will endeavor to prolong its reign by working on the prejudices of the people until wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. ~Abe Lincoln 1ApJdWUdSWYw8n8HEATYhHXA9EYoRTy7c4
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128



View Profile
April 01, 2012, 11:22:46 AM
 #29


is this implemented anywhere? the paper blows my brains out just by looking at it.

you can use it in the way described in proof of concept, but it burns money. I will implement it in a month or two as part of my thesis, however.

and offer some publicly accessible service with it?

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
molecular
Donator
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2128



View Profile
April 01, 2012, 11:28:33 AM
 #30

mila, btc_bear: you are discussing "blockchain in court" in more general terms than the OP asked for, correct?

because using it to prove some data has existed before time x does not involve ownership of keys and such, since it doesn't matter who inserted the hash, right?

PGP key molecular F9B70769 fingerprint 9CDD C0D3 20F8 279F 6BE0  3F39 FC49 2362 F9B7 0769
mila
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 462



View Profile
April 01, 2012, 11:38:34 AM
 #31

mila, btc_bear: you are discussing "blockchain in court" in more general terms than the OP asked for, correct?

because using it to prove some data has existed before time x does not involve ownership of keys and such, since it doesn't matter who inserted the hash, right?

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=74863.msg829561#msg829561
well, ^^ here I was returning from the general topic detour if that link between a file and its timestamp would stand in court. got confused by the reply (forgo the proof unless answering qui bono) and thought about the seti@blockchain for a while but was unable to contribute to the talk.
I mean finding a hash of anything useful in the blockchain should be harder than finding a blockchain (unless I have the file, know which function to use to get its hash and the method how it's encoded in the blockchain).

so refocusing back to OP, I think it is a proof. while a use of a commercial authority to provide something like XAdES-T (signature with certified timestamp) could be easier to justify in a court, blockchain would do basically the same without revealing who made the request in the first place

your ad here:
phelix
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


nmc:id/phelix


View Profile
April 01, 2012, 03:59:24 PM
 #32


is this implemented anywhere? the paper blows my brains out just by looking at it.


you can simply register a name of up to 253 characters with namecoin. timestamping - piece of cake.

blockchained.com ■ bitcointalk top posts
vuce
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476


View Profile
April 01, 2012, 04:20:00 PM
 #33


is this implemented anywhere? the paper blows my brains out just by looking at it.

you can use it in the way described in proof of concept, but it burns money. I will implement it in a month or two as part of my thesis, however.

and offer some publicly accessible service with it?

website forms for submission/verification, most likely.
Pages: « 1 [2]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!