[bisq-network/proposals] Implementation of protection tools: strengthening Account Age by requiring payments from 2 Bank Accounts (#93)

[mpolavieja]

> Signing after a certain date for new markets might put us in a similar situation that if everyone knows this process a scammer could just create a fake account for each market now and wait.

Of course.   Please note that this concern is only thinking forward for an arbitration less context.  A mental exercise to ensure if the implementation we are designing is going to be resilient to that change.   

Being that said, IMO without arbitrators (or any other centralized party) and no previous transaction history at all, I don´t think scammers becoming signers can be prevented without some kind of trusted setup, like maybe a group of bootstraping users using the local reputation system I mentioned above so accounts that don´t trade with honest users (scammers) would "live" in an isolated reputation branch, therefore honest users trading within the initial bootstrap group would have the means to avoid them.

Nevertheless, it the risk can´t be prevented, then it is a risk that can only be corrected.  That is, if scammers get to sneak in as signers, it would be solved through a  blacklisting / banning process as scammers are discovered, so in the short/mid term only honest users would remain as signers. 

In any case, my concern is to prevent making implementation design decissions that would be a big problem in an arbitration-less context, that´s why my question if it is technically possible/compatible with the current design that an account could become a signer just because it is above certain age.

-- 
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/93#issuecomment-505882938
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20190626/06313d62/attachment.html>