[bisq-network/proposals] Proposal to analyze blockchain data of Bisq trades to report on failed trades, arbitration instances and long-term locked funds (Issue #352)

[pazza]

Just wanted to outline my definitions of failed trades.

- On-chain failed trades
- Security related failed trades
- Bisq protocol related failed trades

### Failed on-chain failed trades

My definitions of a on-chain failed trade for the purposes of this specific proposal is:

A failed on-chain trade is occurs when something in a users instance of Bisq is not functioning properly that results in one or any of the following on-chain events **NOT** occurring:

1. Maker fee transaction ID created
2. Taker fee transaction ID created 
3. Deposit transaction ID created
4. For trades that have a Deposit transaction ID created they should also have a Delayed payout transaction ID created OR
5. Taker payout address transaction ID created AND Maker payout address transaction ID created

As a failed trade results in something **NOT** occurring it not possible on-chain to identify it if is a case of:

- Trade failure 
- Trade in pending progress 

The idea of going back to a chain height of 703000 means that I will be balancing looking at trades from fairly recently (October 2021), important for making sure most trades will have been completed with a fairly recent version of Bisq, whilst reducing the instances of trades being in a pending progress. This can be further accounted for by revisiting on-chain data at a later time.

### Failed security related failed trades

My definitions of a Security related failed trade for the purposes of this specific proposal is:

A failed security related trade occurs when something in a users instance of Bisq is not functioning properly, or has been intentionally changed so that it results in one or any of the following on-chain events occurring:

6. For trades that have a Deposit transaction ID created and have a singular payout address that is different from 34VLFgtFKAtwTdZ5rengTT2g2zC99sWQLC, 3EtUWqsGThPtjwUczw27YCo6EWvQdaPUyp, 3A8Zc1XioE2HRzYfbb5P8iemCS72M6vRJV, 38bZBj5peYS3Husdz7AH3gEUiUbYRD951t, or 34VLFgtFKAtwTdZ5rengTT2g2zC99sWQLC.
7. For trades that have a Deposit transaction ID created and have three or more payout addresses. 
8. For maker or taker fees paid in BTC paid to an address other than an associated Bisq address; 1BVxNn3T12veSK6DgqwU4Hdn7QHcDDRag7, 3EtUWqsGThPtjwUczw27YCo6EWvQdaPUyp, 3A8Zc1XioE2HRzYfbb5P8iemCS72M6vRJV, 38bZBj5peYS3Husdz7AH3gEUiUbYRD951t, or critrerias34VLFgtFKAtwTdZ5rengTT2g2zC99sWQLC	
9. For maker or taker fees paid in BSQ that are underpaid.
10. For maker, taker , deposit, or payout transactions that occur for 9 sat/vB e or less.

Hopefully zero of the trades looked at will meet criteria's 6, 7 and 8, and a marginal percentage will meet criteria's 9 and 10.

### Bisq protocol related failed trades

My definitions of a Bisq protocol related failed trade is:

A failed Bisq protocol related trade when something in a users instance of Bisq is not functioning properly that results in, for example, one or any of the following occurring, this may or may not result in an on-chain failure:

- No payment method info shared
- Account age info not shared
- Signed status not shared
- Trade not assigned to a mediator
- Trade chat messages not deliverable
- Mediation or arbitration support ticket not opened
- Specific java errors occurring during trade 

These errors, whilst important to identify and reduce, are outside the scope of an on-chain analysis, this proposal.

### Other notes

Just to clarify that this is on chain only and in no way will used to identify or look at trade of any individual Bisq users activity. It is looking at 400 chronological trades that take place on the platform to provide some insights.

Also I expect to run into a few barriers and problems with on-chain analysis mainly as a result of on-chain failures being difficult to identify as failed rather than pending trades, and, therefore, how to correctly categorize them. Nevertheless I feel this proposal would be a useful exercise that would provide useful information and likely more questions to be answered. 

Though it would be useful to put down my thoughts process in writing, if anyone has any comments, suggestions, corrections or questions please let me know.


-- 
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/352#issuecomment-991410117
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20211210/92409701/attachment-0001.htm>