[bisq-network/proposals] N-factor counterparty confidence mechanisms (#83)

[mpolavieja]

> no money is ever sent to the seller, greatly reducing the chance honest traders end up dealing with shady/stolen property

This is very interesting.   For me the delay was a very important measure to protect private property by restoring the damages to the fiat victim and by avoiding damage to the seller.   This is even better as it **prevents** that from happening!!, which as you say is very good for the seller not to have problems with his bank.

> **Verification methods need to be carried out for every new trading peer.** Would be great if we could figure out a clever way to cache previous successful trading peers locally (beyond onion address -- by actual payment account) so verification doesn't need to be done again for 2 people who have traded before.

As @flix1 stated in [this comment](https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/78#issuecomment-490131197) verification should always be done at payment account level. Couldn´t it be possible to store locally a whitelist of trusted payments accounts?

-- 
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/83#issuecomment-490370580
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20190507/627b7798/attachment.html>