Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network? Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Vote early, vote often!How is the human end of the Bitcoin network secured?Is Bitcoin network an Asynchronous network or a synchronous network?Does changing mining algorithm(SHA256) of bitcoin cause any side effect?How does the lightning network solve double spending?How is Bitcoin itself represented (either technically or code level)Could a large group of miners theoretically lower the network hashrate to manipulate difficulty?Calculate the difficulty of Bitcoin networkWhy should SPV nodes operate on the P2P network?Can someone please explain the meaning of “neutrino” within the lightning network?Neutrino enables full mining nodes without storing the entire chain?

Why is an operator the quantum mechanical analogue of an observable?

Why does the Cisco show run command not show the full version, while the show version command does?

The art of proof summarizing. Are there known rules, or is it a purely common sense matter?

Arriving in Atlanta after US Preclearance in Dublin. Will I go through TSA security in Atlanta to transfer to a connecting flight?

Are these square matrices always diagonalisable?

Are all CP/M-80 implementations binary compatible?

Why is this method for solving linear equations systems using determinants works?

Multiple fireplaces in an apartment building?

Additive group of local rings

What's parked in Mil Moscow helicopter plant?

Is a 5 watt UHF/VHF handheld considered QRP?

Do I need to protect SFP ports and optics from dust/contaminants? If so, how?

As an international instructor, should I openly talk about my accent?

Is accepting an invalid credit card number a security issue?

Is Electric Central Heating worth it if using Solar Panels?

Book with legacy programming code on a space ship that the main character hacks to escape

Protagonist's race is hidden - should I reveal it?

What is the term for a person whose job is to place products on shelves in stores?

Identify story/novel: Tribe on colonized planet, not aware of this. "Taboo," altitude sickness, robot guardian (60s? Young Adult?)

How would I use different systems of magic when they are capable of the same effects?

How to find the right literary agent in the USA?

Would reducing the reference voltage of an ADC have any effect on accuracy?

What is "leading note" and what does it mean to "raise a note"?

Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network?



Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network?



Unicorn Meta Zoo #1: Why another podcast?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Vote early, vote often!How is the human end of the Bitcoin network secured?Is Bitcoin network an Asynchronous network or a synchronous network?Does changing mining algorithm(SHA256) of bitcoin cause any side effect?How does the lightning network solve double spending?How is Bitcoin itself represented (either technically or code level)Could a large group of miners theoretically lower the network hashrate to manipulate difficulty?Calculate the difficulty of Bitcoin networkWhy should SPV nodes operate on the P2P network?Can someone please explain the meaning of “neutrino” within the lightning network?Neutrino enables full mining nodes without storing the entire chain?










3















TWO questions on Neutrino::



1) Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network? Or other formulation: ...hinder higher degree of decentralization?



Why I am asking: This article by Dorier pointed me to this thoughts. https://medium.com/@nicolasdorier/neutrino-is-dangerous-for-my-self-sovereignty-18fac5bcdc25



He basically says neutrino users are still not FULL NODES. Therefore doesnt make sense to switch from SPVs or webwallets to neutrino enabled wallets....



Could the technical knowledgable members here maybe do an explanation, why Dorier might come up with this thesis, what technical arguments are speaking for it? Or do you think its a baseless thesis?



2) He basically says, why do we need neutrino, its essentially the same as SPV... Why is there technical advantages with Neutrino, what are its differentiators to SPV?



Thank you










share|improve this question






















  • I think this question is mostly opinion based.

    – Pieter Wuille
    4 hours ago















3















TWO questions on Neutrino::



1) Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network? Or other formulation: ...hinder higher degree of decentralization?



Why I am asking: This article by Dorier pointed me to this thoughts. https://medium.com/@nicolasdorier/neutrino-is-dangerous-for-my-self-sovereignty-18fac5bcdc25



He basically says neutrino users are still not FULL NODES. Therefore doesnt make sense to switch from SPVs or webwallets to neutrino enabled wallets....



Could the technical knowledgable members here maybe do an explanation, why Dorier might come up with this thesis, what technical arguments are speaking for it? Or do you think its a baseless thesis?



2) He basically says, why do we need neutrino, its essentially the same as SPV... Why is there technical advantages with Neutrino, what are its differentiators to SPV?



Thank you










share|improve this question






















  • I think this question is mostly opinion based.

    – Pieter Wuille
    4 hours ago













3












3








3








TWO questions on Neutrino::



1) Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network? Or other formulation: ...hinder higher degree of decentralization?



Why I am asking: This article by Dorier pointed me to this thoughts. https://medium.com/@nicolasdorier/neutrino-is-dangerous-for-my-self-sovereignty-18fac5bcdc25



He basically says neutrino users are still not FULL NODES. Therefore doesnt make sense to switch from SPVs or webwallets to neutrino enabled wallets....



Could the technical knowledgable members here maybe do an explanation, why Dorier might come up with this thesis, what technical arguments are speaking for it? Or do you think its a baseless thesis?



2) He basically says, why do we need neutrino, its essentially the same as SPV... Why is there technical advantages with Neutrino, what are its differentiators to SPV?



Thank you










share|improve this question














TWO questions on Neutrino::



1) Could Neutrino technically as side-effect, incentivize centralization of the bitcoin network? Or other formulation: ...hinder higher degree of decentralization?



Why I am asking: This article by Dorier pointed me to this thoughts. https://medium.com/@nicolasdorier/neutrino-is-dangerous-for-my-self-sovereignty-18fac5bcdc25



He basically says neutrino users are still not FULL NODES. Therefore doesnt make sense to switch from SPVs or webwallets to neutrino enabled wallets....



Could the technical knowledgable members here maybe do an explanation, why Dorier might come up with this thesis, what technical arguments are speaking for it? Or do you think its a baseless thesis?



2) He basically says, why do we need neutrino, its essentially the same as SPV... Why is there technical advantages with Neutrino, what are its differentiators to SPV?



Thank you







bitcoin-core wallet bitcoincore-development neutrino






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked 4 hours ago









johnsmiththelirdjohnsmiththelird

594




594












  • I think this question is mostly opinion based.

    – Pieter Wuille
    4 hours ago

















  • I think this question is mostly opinion based.

    – Pieter Wuille
    4 hours ago
















I think this question is mostly opinion based.

– Pieter Wuille
4 hours ago





I think this question is mostly opinion based.

– Pieter Wuille
4 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















4














Dorier is correct that Neutrino/SPV nodes are not full nodes, because they do not verify the entirety of the blockchain, leaving potential room for attack. However, the portrayal that Neutrino is no better than other SPV modes is not correct.



Neutrino is a form of SPV which improves greatly over other implementations in regards to privacy. All SPV modes inherently leak some hints about transactions you wish to receive because the information must be queried. Neutrino improves over previous SPV modes by limiting precision of information leaked to the blocks which contain the transactions they are concerned with. A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur.




The trouble with SPV nodes is that they only verify that transactions have occurred using some SPV proofs, but they do not guarantee that you are on the correct, most proof-of-work chain. Any single deviation of the full validation rules could fork off onto a separate chain, where the full nodes would reject the chain which SPV users might follow.



To give a concrete example, the maximum block size is part of the validation rules. A full node will never accept a block which is over the allowed size. An SPV node may accept any sized block as truthful, because it doesn't know the block size and cannot measure it - it only receives the block header and it must trust the servers delivering the block header information to have properly validated the information.



The only way to counter this is to perform all of validation rules expected by a full node, which includes the block size, and therefore, requires you to receive all of the transactions in a block to measure its size.



Another validation not performed by current SPV modes is the rules regarding the coinbase transaction, which mints new coins. Deviation from this rule could lead to inflation of the supply of coins on the chain followed by an SPV node, who would be none the wiser.




The above do not mean that SPV nodes are inherently bad or must necessarily be avoided - but highlights that there is an attack surface which SPV nodes are vulnerable to, but which full nodes are immune to by design.



The concern that Dorier and others have, is that if it becomes commonplace to ditch running full nodes because of the expectation that a Neutrino node is good enough, then full nodes might begin dropping off the network and leaving fewer and fewer entities responsible for the validation of the full set of rules. If an overwhelming majority of nodes simply follow the rules of a few validators, then protection of the economic majority against inflation and block size expansion would be weakened compared to a network where a majority of people validate all of the rules.






share|improve this answer























  • "A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

    – Acccumulation
    17 mins ago











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "308"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f87271%2fcould-neutrino-technically-as-side-effect-incentivize-centralization-of-the-bit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









4














Dorier is correct that Neutrino/SPV nodes are not full nodes, because they do not verify the entirety of the blockchain, leaving potential room for attack. However, the portrayal that Neutrino is no better than other SPV modes is not correct.



Neutrino is a form of SPV which improves greatly over other implementations in regards to privacy. All SPV modes inherently leak some hints about transactions you wish to receive because the information must be queried. Neutrino improves over previous SPV modes by limiting precision of information leaked to the blocks which contain the transactions they are concerned with. A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur.




The trouble with SPV nodes is that they only verify that transactions have occurred using some SPV proofs, but they do not guarantee that you are on the correct, most proof-of-work chain. Any single deviation of the full validation rules could fork off onto a separate chain, where the full nodes would reject the chain which SPV users might follow.



To give a concrete example, the maximum block size is part of the validation rules. A full node will never accept a block which is over the allowed size. An SPV node may accept any sized block as truthful, because it doesn't know the block size and cannot measure it - it only receives the block header and it must trust the servers delivering the block header information to have properly validated the information.



The only way to counter this is to perform all of validation rules expected by a full node, which includes the block size, and therefore, requires you to receive all of the transactions in a block to measure its size.



Another validation not performed by current SPV modes is the rules regarding the coinbase transaction, which mints new coins. Deviation from this rule could lead to inflation of the supply of coins on the chain followed by an SPV node, who would be none the wiser.




The above do not mean that SPV nodes are inherently bad or must necessarily be avoided - but highlights that there is an attack surface which SPV nodes are vulnerable to, but which full nodes are immune to by design.



The concern that Dorier and others have, is that if it becomes commonplace to ditch running full nodes because of the expectation that a Neutrino node is good enough, then full nodes might begin dropping off the network and leaving fewer and fewer entities responsible for the validation of the full set of rules. If an overwhelming majority of nodes simply follow the rules of a few validators, then protection of the economic majority against inflation and block size expansion would be weakened compared to a network where a majority of people validate all of the rules.






share|improve this answer























  • "A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

    – Acccumulation
    17 mins ago















4














Dorier is correct that Neutrino/SPV nodes are not full nodes, because they do not verify the entirety of the blockchain, leaving potential room for attack. However, the portrayal that Neutrino is no better than other SPV modes is not correct.



Neutrino is a form of SPV which improves greatly over other implementations in regards to privacy. All SPV modes inherently leak some hints about transactions you wish to receive because the information must be queried. Neutrino improves over previous SPV modes by limiting precision of information leaked to the blocks which contain the transactions they are concerned with. A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur.




The trouble with SPV nodes is that they only verify that transactions have occurred using some SPV proofs, but they do not guarantee that you are on the correct, most proof-of-work chain. Any single deviation of the full validation rules could fork off onto a separate chain, where the full nodes would reject the chain which SPV users might follow.



To give a concrete example, the maximum block size is part of the validation rules. A full node will never accept a block which is over the allowed size. An SPV node may accept any sized block as truthful, because it doesn't know the block size and cannot measure it - it only receives the block header and it must trust the servers delivering the block header information to have properly validated the information.



The only way to counter this is to perform all of validation rules expected by a full node, which includes the block size, and therefore, requires you to receive all of the transactions in a block to measure its size.



Another validation not performed by current SPV modes is the rules regarding the coinbase transaction, which mints new coins. Deviation from this rule could lead to inflation of the supply of coins on the chain followed by an SPV node, who would be none the wiser.




The above do not mean that SPV nodes are inherently bad or must necessarily be avoided - but highlights that there is an attack surface which SPV nodes are vulnerable to, but which full nodes are immune to by design.



The concern that Dorier and others have, is that if it becomes commonplace to ditch running full nodes because of the expectation that a Neutrino node is good enough, then full nodes might begin dropping off the network and leaving fewer and fewer entities responsible for the validation of the full set of rules. If an overwhelming majority of nodes simply follow the rules of a few validators, then protection of the economic majority against inflation and block size expansion would be weakened compared to a network where a majority of people validate all of the rules.






share|improve this answer























  • "A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

    – Acccumulation
    17 mins ago













4












4








4







Dorier is correct that Neutrino/SPV nodes are not full nodes, because they do not verify the entirety of the blockchain, leaving potential room for attack. However, the portrayal that Neutrino is no better than other SPV modes is not correct.



Neutrino is a form of SPV which improves greatly over other implementations in regards to privacy. All SPV modes inherently leak some hints about transactions you wish to receive because the information must be queried. Neutrino improves over previous SPV modes by limiting precision of information leaked to the blocks which contain the transactions they are concerned with. A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur.




The trouble with SPV nodes is that they only verify that transactions have occurred using some SPV proofs, but they do not guarantee that you are on the correct, most proof-of-work chain. Any single deviation of the full validation rules could fork off onto a separate chain, where the full nodes would reject the chain which SPV users might follow.



To give a concrete example, the maximum block size is part of the validation rules. A full node will never accept a block which is over the allowed size. An SPV node may accept any sized block as truthful, because it doesn't know the block size and cannot measure it - it only receives the block header and it must trust the servers delivering the block header information to have properly validated the information.



The only way to counter this is to perform all of validation rules expected by a full node, which includes the block size, and therefore, requires you to receive all of the transactions in a block to measure its size.



Another validation not performed by current SPV modes is the rules regarding the coinbase transaction, which mints new coins. Deviation from this rule could lead to inflation of the supply of coins on the chain followed by an SPV node, who would be none the wiser.




The above do not mean that SPV nodes are inherently bad or must necessarily be avoided - but highlights that there is an attack surface which SPV nodes are vulnerable to, but which full nodes are immune to by design.



The concern that Dorier and others have, is that if it becomes commonplace to ditch running full nodes because of the expectation that a Neutrino node is good enough, then full nodes might begin dropping off the network and leaving fewer and fewer entities responsible for the validation of the full set of rules. If an overwhelming majority of nodes simply follow the rules of a few validators, then protection of the economic majority against inflation and block size expansion would be weakened compared to a network where a majority of people validate all of the rules.






share|improve this answer













Dorier is correct that Neutrino/SPV nodes are not full nodes, because they do not verify the entirety of the blockchain, leaving potential room for attack. However, the portrayal that Neutrino is no better than other SPV modes is not correct.



Neutrino is a form of SPV which improves greatly over other implementations in regards to privacy. All SPV modes inherently leak some hints about transactions you wish to receive because the information must be queried. Neutrino improves over previous SPV modes by limiting precision of information leaked to the blocks which contain the transactions they are concerned with. A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur.




The trouble with SPV nodes is that they only verify that transactions have occurred using some SPV proofs, but they do not guarantee that you are on the correct, most proof-of-work chain. Any single deviation of the full validation rules could fork off onto a separate chain, where the full nodes would reject the chain which SPV users might follow.



To give a concrete example, the maximum block size is part of the validation rules. A full node will never accept a block which is over the allowed size. An SPV node may accept any sized block as truthful, because it doesn't know the block size and cannot measure it - it only receives the block header and it must trust the servers delivering the block header information to have properly validated the information.



The only way to counter this is to perform all of validation rules expected by a full node, which includes the block size, and therefore, requires you to receive all of the transactions in a block to measure its size.



Another validation not performed by current SPV modes is the rules regarding the coinbase transaction, which mints new coins. Deviation from this rule could lead to inflation of the supply of coins on the chain followed by an SPV node, who would be none the wiser.




The above do not mean that SPV nodes are inherently bad or must necessarily be avoided - but highlights that there is an attack surface which SPV nodes are vulnerable to, but which full nodes are immune to by design.



The concern that Dorier and others have, is that if it becomes commonplace to ditch running full nodes because of the expectation that a Neutrino node is good enough, then full nodes might begin dropping off the network and leaving fewer and fewer entities responsible for the validation of the full set of rules. If an overwhelming majority of nodes simply follow the rules of a few validators, then protection of the economic majority against inflation and block size expansion would be weakened compared to a network where a majority of people validate all of the rules.







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered 2 hours ago









Mark HMark H

1,07919




1,07919












  • "A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

    – Acccumulation
    17 mins ago

















  • "A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

    – Acccumulation
    17 mins ago
















"A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

– Acccumulation
17 mins ago





"A full node does not leak any information because all blocks are archived and no querying needs to occur." Seems like technically, all querying occurs, and thus no information is leaked because there is no division into queried/not queried.

– Acccumulation
17 mins ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Bitcoin Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fbitcoin.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f87271%2fcould-neutrino-technically-as-side-effect-incentivize-centralization-of-the-bit%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Oświęcim Innehåll Historia | Källor | Externa länkar | Navigeringsmeny50°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.2213950°2′18″N 19°13′17″Ö / 50.03833°N 19.22139°Ö / 50.03833; 19.221393089658Nordisk familjebok, AuschwitzInsidan tro och existensJewish Community i OświęcimAuschwitz Jewish Center: MuseumAuschwitz Jewish Center

Valle di Casies Indice Geografia fisica | Origini del nome | Storia | Società | Amministrazione | Sport | Note | Bibliografia | Voci correlate | Altri progetti | Collegamenti esterni | Menu di navigazione46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)46°46′N 12°11′E / 46.766667°N 12.183333°E46.766667; 12.183333 (Valle di Casies)Sito istituzionaleAstat Censimento della popolazione 2011 - Determinazione della consistenza dei tre gruppi linguistici della Provincia Autonoma di Bolzano-Alto Adige - giugno 2012Numeri e fattiValle di CasiesDato IstatTabella dei gradi/giorno dei Comuni italiani raggruppati per Regione e Provincia26 agosto 1993, n. 412Heraldry of the World: GsiesStatistiche I.StatValCasies.comWikimedia CommonsWikimedia CommonsValle di CasiesSito ufficialeValle di CasiesMM14870458910042978-6

Typsetting diagram chases (with TikZ?) Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)How to define the default vertical distance between nodes?Draw edge on arcNumerical conditional within tikz keys?TikZ: Drawing an arc from an intersection to an intersectionDrawing rectilinear curves in Tikz, aka an Etch-a-Sketch drawingLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themHow to place nodes in an absolute coordinate system in tikzCommutative diagram with curve connecting between nodesTikz with standalone: pinning tikz coordinates to page cmDrawing a Decision Diagram with Tikz and layout manager