[bisq-network/proposals] Distributed reputation system (#78)

[Christoph Atteneder]

> Regarding your attack concern: If the scammer uses the account for any tx it is likely that the fraud gets detected and leads to a chargeback and he loses control over the account. The signing of the AccountAgeWitness does not mean that the account owner is immediately trusted. It starts aging from that moment on and only after a certain time it is considered trusted. If it was a scammer it get banned anyway via the filter objects.

Would it make sense to make signatures by a scammer account invalid? Just to prevent having lots of sub-accounts of the scammer  in the system that might be trusted ones in the future?

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/78#issuecomment-485790308
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20190423/47fa41de/attachment-0001.html>