Bitcoin Cash Eat.Do - Get up to 70% off on popular restaurant cuisines when paying with Bitcoin Cash!

Eat.Do - Get up to 70% off on popular restaurant cuisines when paying with Bitcoin Cash!
Lightning Network Privacy Issues with Proof of Payment
Feb 22 2018 Crypto Market Report - Contains Bitcoin Cash
2018 Cryptocurrency Crash (Elliott Wave): Bear Market Resumes?
Bitcoincasinos.cash Adds New Bitcoin Cash Casino Sites
Offering $1k+ USD bounty for coinb.in multisig recovery tools
In Ratio we trust – the basis of stability for crypto-currency
funding the cash devs

Eat.Do - Get up to 70% off on popular restaurant cuisines when paying with Bitcoin Cash!

Posted: 22 Feb 2018 01:15 PM PST

How many pizzas does 10,000 BCH buy?

Certainly more than two if you order 'em through us!

Hello there, we're Eat.Do the #1 provider of quality restaurant cuisine! We're launching a public BETA of our latest project where we aim to provide quality restaurant cuisines whilst giving a 70% discount for users of Bitcoin Cash!

Please understand that we're still busy working on the site and just recently launched. We're looking for suggestions and feedback, so if you got any or notice any inconsistencies or otherwise with our site then please reach us by email through email@eat.do!

Coupon Code: 70OFF

FAQ

Q: How are you able to provide 70% off?

A: Through arbitrage, we take care of purchasing the electronic gift cards at a discount from various 2nd hand markets, including but not limited to, Card Cash, ABC Gift Card, Raise, CardPool, Gift Card Spread, Gift Card Bin, Card Kangaroo, Monster Gift Card, Gift Card Zen, GiftMe, Card Flip, various gift card churning forums, Slack channels, subreddits and various trading clubs (i.e. Gift Card Wiki).

Q: Do you offer a warrant?

A: Yes we do! All 3rd parties we order from have a 30-365 days full replacement warranty which we will pass onto you in the unlikely event that any issues should occur.

Q: Can I request a restaurant of my choice?

A: Yes, feel free to post requests below, send us a PM or email us at email@eat.do!

submitted by /u/Shannatrh
[link] [comments]

Lightning Network Privacy Issues with Proof of Payment

Posted: 22 Feb 2018 08:03 AM PST

(copied from Lightning Dev mailing list)

I am a bit concerned with the privacy implications of having either a signed invoice + pre-image, or possibly a more powerful proof-of-payment mechanism. In particular, I am concerned that it might provide cryptographic evidence to the buyer that a certain seller performed the transaction, and/or evidence to the seller that a certain buyer performed the transaction.

In many cases, providing this evidence would be a feature rather than a bug, allowing third-party dispute settlement (e.g. the legal system). However, in my opinion, the Lightning network should also (or especially) be suitable for more "sensitive" transactions. Even when transactions are not illegal, I believe people still have a need to keep some transaction information private. You don't want it to be possible that your transaction history is stored on some company/person's server for years, and then leaks out when that server gets hacked. Also, in my opinion, we should not create a two-tier system of "sensitive" and "nothing-to-hide" transactions: that would make the "sensitive" transactions automatically suspicious, partially negating the whole objective of being able to do sensitive transactions without experiencing negative consequences.

To some degree, node IDs can act as pseudonyms, without evidence that ties them to physical identities. However, I consider them to be relatively poor pseudonyms: unlike, for instance, Bitcoin addresses, creating a new node for every new transaction would have a serious scalability impact, and defeat the whole purpose of Lightning. I think a typical person would frequently perform transactions that are inherently tied to their physical identity, e.g. receiving salary. This could give the counterparty (the employer) a link between physical ID and node ID; it might be forced to share this e.g. with authorities, further increasing the odds of leak-out and/or abuse of data.

Maybe the solution is to have multiple nodes: one tied to your physical ID, and one or more virtual identities? You could then transfer funds between these nodes, and make sure no outsiders receive any proof-of-payment info about these transfers. It sounds like an expensive solution though, since you'd have to operate more channels to give each node good connectivity.

What are your ideas on this? Should proof of payment be optional? Should its strength (optionally) be reduced, so that it can only be used in front of some previously-agreed-on dispute resolution party (is that even possible)? Should the idea of proof of payment be abandoned altogether? Is bi-directional routing(*) useful in this?

CJP

(*) Payee first finds a route from a rendezvous node to himself, onion-encrypts that route, passes it to payer (together with rendezvous node ID), and payer adds to that route the onion route from payer to rendezvous point. This way, payer knows the rendezvous node ID, but not the payee node ID. Payee knows the rendezvous node ID, but doesn't know payer node ID either. Rendezvous node only knows that it's forwarding a transaction, not from-where-to-where, or the purpose of the transaction.

submitted by /u/ahaproudowl
[link] [comments]

Feb 22 2018 Crypto Market Report - Contains Bitcoin Cash

Posted: 22 Feb 2018 01:51 PM PST