Author

Topic: Is it really fair to claim that a LN-Tx is the same as a normal bitcoin Tx? (Read 1043 times)

sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
I have a question.

There is a lot of confusion about some people implying that the Lightning network wil make the Bitcoin system somehow more centralized.

Based on what I read, I see no proof of this. Actually the way I currently see it, the benefits of LN far outweigh its bad attributes.

Can someone with good technical knowledge expand on centralizatio/decentralization of LN? Thanks.
Might be confusing Lightning Network with Bitcoin Unlimited, lots of posts around claiming BU is too centralized.
jr. member
Activity: 52
Merit: 53
I have a question.

There is a lot of confusion about some people implying that the Lightning network wil make the Bitcoin system somehow more centralized.

Based on what I read, I see no proof of this. Actually the way I currently see it, the benefits of LN far outweigh its bad attributes.

Can someone with good technical knowledge expand on centralizatio/decentralization of LN? Thanks.

I may be wrong, but I believe that Lightning would only serve as a decentralizing force in the bitcoin ecosystem.. Since there are no trusted middlemen in Lightning and since Lightning would bring back an incentive to run a full-node.

Anyway..did you see the rest of my Lightning FAQ?
https://medium.com/@AudunGulbrands1/lightning-faq-67bd2b957d70#.6tzmwqnbd

I will encourage you to post your question as a new topic in this forum!
It’s a great question and I would love to read the responses on it!

Please give me a link if you decide to do so.
member
Activity: 73
Merit: 10
I have a question.

There is a lot of confusion about some people implying that the Lightning network wil make the Bitcoin system somehow more centralized.

Based on what I read, I see no proof of this. Actually the way I currently see it, the benefits of LN far outweigh its bad attributes.

Can someone with good technical knowledge expand on centralizatio/decentralization of LN? Thanks.
legendary
Activity: 3430
Merit: 3080
The security model of a Lightning Tx is different from the security model of traditional bitcoin Tx.

This is the most pertinent part.


Lightning transactions are as the text decribes, in essence zero-confirmation Bitcoin transactions that are not broadcast publicly like on-chain transactions are.


But this does not make them as insecure as zero-conf on-chain transactions, as they use a combination of time-locked funds and mutually exchanged revocation secrets to reinstate the security that zero-conf on-chain transactions lack.

So, it's fair to say that Lightning is less secure than on-chain, but more secure than zero-conf on-chain. But Lightning will be better suited to IRL purchases anyway, the infamous cup of coffee use-case. Cafes don't want to screw their customers over for the most part, they have to live with the consequences of that, so using Lightning in situations where you trust who you're buying from is the most suitable use case (and also matches the high transaction volume, and instant fund clearance Lightning achieves with the high transaction, instant fund clearance requirements of IRL businesses)

It's possible too that an improvement in the design of Lightning, or an alternative off-chain network design might be able to give us 100% trustless funds clearance like on-chain transactions do, but we'll have to wait to see how that pans out.
jr. member
Activity: 52
Merit: 53
I recently made a post r/bitcoin (also posted the same here on Bitcointalk) with the following title:

A Lightning Tx *IS* a bitcoin Tx, and here's why
Link: https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/5xoijr/a_lightning_tx_is_a_bitcoin_tx_and_heres_why/

After this post I got some valid criticism from /u/jratcliff63367 for not highlighting the fact that a Lightning Tx is a zero-conformation Tx.

The source of my content was my own Lightning FAQ that I have published on Medium.
Link: https://medium.com/@AudunGulbrands1/lightning-faq-67bd2b957d70#.p1nql0g2b

To address the criticism from /u/jratcliff63367 I have now added a new question to my Lightning FAQ.

Please check it out below:
Feedback is appreciated as always!

 
Q 14.1:
A standard bitcoin Tx is dependent on confirmations in the blockchain...
So, is it really fair to claim that a Lightning Tx is the same as a normal bitcoin Tx?

This is a valid point, they are not the same...
A Lightning Tx is a zero-confirmation Tx. But if it is broadcasted to the bitcoin network; it will be just as valid as any “on-chain” zero-confirmation Tx.
Both types of Tx will eventually be mined into the bitcoin blockchain if they pay a sufficient fee.

However, a LN-Tx has a different security model that makes it much more reliable when compared to a standard zero-confirmation Tx.

A Lightning Tx is only indirectly secured by Proof of Work. This is due to fact that a Lightning Network will be completely dependent on the underlying bitcoin network (see Q12)

Within an open Lightning channel; there is a different set of game-theoretical mechanisms that provide a different type of security model.

Lightning will extend the capabilities of bitcoin without the need for a trusted third party.
But the tradeoff is that you must monitor the bitcoin network by the operation of a full-node.

This monitoring can be outsourced, but in that case you must trust an external server to actually do its job. Your money will still not be routed through this server. The only role of the server is to monitor the bitcoin network, and to broadcast a so-called Penalty Transaction when necessary.

Note that the use of this service is an option, in case you don't want to run your own full-node.
It will not be possible for this third party to steal money from a Lightning channel.

Also note that the LN is intended as a platform for low-value-transfer (sub $100)

All LN transactions are multi-signature and both participants in a channel must sign for a Tx to become valid. A traditional double-spending attack is therefore made extremely difficult.
However, there is a risk that someone can broadcast an obsolete Lightning Tx to the bitcoin network.
An obsolete Lightning Tx is a Tx that does not represent the latest state of its channel.

The above mentioned risk is the reason that you (or a service that you trust) must operate a “Watcher Node”.
This node will monitor all the transactions that are broadcasted to the bitcoin network.

If your Watcher Node discovers an obsolete Tx; it will (as a countermeasure) broadcast a “Penalty Transaction”
The Penalty Transaction gives you the power to confiscate all the money within your channel (including the money that belongs to your counterpart) 
However, a penalty Tx can only become valid after the discovery of a broadcasted obsolete Tx.

Your ability to broadcast a Penalty Transaction makes it very risky for your counterpart to broadcast an obsolete Tx.

Another security/privacy feature, is that all Lightning Tx will be end-to-end encrypted between the participants.

Conclusion:
The security model of a Lightning Tx is different from the security model of traditional bitcoin Tx.
A Lightning Tx will still be regarded as a valid bitcoin Tx if broadcasted to the bitcoin network.

However;
A Lightning Tx will not be publicly broadcasted as long as the channel stays open.
It will only be exchanged between the participants in a channel, and they will store the Tx locally.

We can therefore define a Lightning-Tx as:
A Non-Broadcasted-Zero-Confirmation-Bitcoin-Tx with some additional Security-Mechanisms.
Jump to: