Pages:
Author

Topic: What would happen if ISPs start blocking cryptocurrency data? - page 2. (Read 16269 times)

sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Sounds good. Are you sure that would be enough though? Is there such a type of backup plan already? Or is it just one of the obvious things that could be done in response? I mean, how fleshed out is this idea?

The ACME Act would also make pool operators outlaws, in the same way someone operating a US Dollar printing press would be (other than the Fed).

Would the Pool Operators need to reveal their identities when issuing the self-signed SSL certs? How could Pool Operators remain hidden?



The ACME Act is only in the US, the US is not the centre of the universe. There are 6.5 billion other people on this rock, some 92% of the population who are not US. So the US outlaws US Pool Operators and miners but the rest of the planet will continue.

The Pool Operator doesn't need to reveal their identity, they just generate a self-signed cert for an IP address or URL, you as a miner add their public certificate to your certificate store and now your browser trusts them and can setup and SSL channel. To break it you will need to crack either their or your own private key. Alternately and even better would be the use of a Bitcoin address as part of the miner code that communicates with the pool as Bitcoin which already has an equivalent public and private addresses built in which are essentially the same as public and private certificates or keys, technically it would be very easy to do.
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1013
You write a transport protocol wrapper that makes Bitcoin traffic look like Xbox Live traffic, or something like that.
member
Activity: 115
Merit: 11
There's a guy on this forum who already managed to make bitcoin work over I2P.
sr. member
Activity: 433
Merit: 260
Sounds good. Are you sure that would be enough though? Is there such a type of backup plan already? Or is it just one of the obvious things that could be done in response? I mean, how fleshed out is this idea?

The ACME Act would also make pool operators outlaws, in the same way someone operating a US Dollar printing press would be (other than the Fed).

Would the Pool Operators need to reveal their identities when issuing the self-signed SSL certs? How could Pool Operators remain hidden?

sr. member
Activity: 252
Merit: 250
Say the USG calls an "emergency" meeting with the UNSC and they all agree that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are now the "largest threat to the world economy"... They adopt as a UN Resolution the American proposal "Anti-Counterfeiting Measures Emergency Act of 2014". So each member nation-state has to legally "force" ISPs to "log and discard" all packets that match certain strings.

What happens then? Would it be the end of Bitcoin? The end of cryptocurrencies? What's the response of the Bitcoin dev team?



...


Not beyond the whit of man or even a good techhie  Wink

All the virtual coin currencies would move to port 80 with SSL enabled with the Trusted Root SSL certificates self singed and issued by the Pool Operators. Traffic can be relayed via some other country to stop host countries knowing what server is a pool server.
sr. member
Activity: 433
Merit: 260
Port blocking? We're talking sophistication here.

Notice I said that when following the ACME Act, packets are discarded when "matching certain strings"... This is much more computationally expensive than blocking traffic by port, but note who and what we're talking about here.

Can blockchain data be detected based on examination of the data (strings or regexes) by ISPs? If yes, is there a viable encryption/scrambling method that could defeat this measure?
global moderator
Activity: 4018
Merit: 2728
Join the world-leading crypto sportsbook NOW!
The real issue is making sure that we can continue to trade Bitcoin for fiat money.  

That could be a problem for some countries, but either way, there's always ways around it and people will still find a way to use it.
full member
Activity: 121
Merit: 100
Bitcoin developers will just start encrypting the data to prevent ISPs from knowing what the data is I suppose.

If that's not already being done.
msc
sr. member
Activity: 284
Merit: 250
Change the port number, and perhaps alter the protocol slightly, and it won't be blockable.  Bitcoin clients could even communicate on the HTTPS port so that ISP's wouldn't be able to tell the difference between Bitcoin and a secure Web site.  It's not a big deal.

The real issue is making sure that we can continue to trade Bitcoin for fiat money.  
hero member
Activity: 840
Merit: 509
Not gonna happen. They gonna ban computers and the internet next?
sr. member
Activity: 433
Merit: 260
Say the USG calls an "emergency" meeting with the UNSC and they all agree that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies are now the "largest threat to the world economy"... They adopt as a UN Resolution the American proposal "Anti-Counterfeiting Measures Emergency Act of 2014". So each member nation-state has to legally "force" ISPs to "log and discard" all packets that match certain strings.

What happens then? Would it be the end of Bitcoin? The end of cryptocurrencies? What's the response of the Bitcoin dev team?



edit:

Got this idea from monsterer:

That's the whole POINT of bitcoin.  Once the network gets big enough, they won't have the *ability* to decide to "allow" it or not.  They don't "allow" pirating or The Pirate Bay, and of course nobody pirates any more and the Pirate Bay website has been shut down for good.

This is a fundamental fallacy shared by many bitcoiners. Governments can easily 'not allow' bitcoin (for all intents and purposes) by simply passing a new law saying any ISP relaying bitcoin related traffic will be shut down.

That move alone vastly reduces the number of miners and nodes probably to the point where a 51% attack becomes easy, and the currency crumbles.

Don't get me wrong, I'm extremely positive about bitcoin but you have to understand how vunerable it is.

Cheers, Paul.
Pages:
Jump to: