tevador

> Are you suggesting giving mining pools the privilege to store arbitrary data into the blockchain? No. Currently anyone can store arbitrary data on the blockchain. We could either completely...

> There's supposed to be an off-chain agreement-trust between sender and receiver A malicious sender doesn't need an agreement with anyone. As an extreme example, imagine a KYC exchange started...

This proposal by @UkoeHB is also relevant: https://github.com/monero-project/monero/issues/6456 It suggests removing all non-optional parts of a transaction from the tx_extra field.

> If there is a feature which only a subset of Monero users find valuable, it requires adding data to transactions, and the core team either isn't interested or does...

I suggest to at least make an announcement that Monero is planning to discontinue the tx_extra field in the near future to discourage new implementations. We can then discuss the...

Any progress on this issue? Is there consensus to put this on the roadmap for a future protocol update?

> My proposal, as TX extra becomes for arbitrary data only, would be to cap it at 256 bytes. Except this doesn't fix the main issue, which is splitting the...

As noted by @kayabaNerve, you can take 30 arbitrary bytes and bruteforce the remaining 16 bits until you get a valid EC point (the chance of failure is only 2-16)....

> Any thoughts on removing it for stenography or a mandatory inclusion? I don't understand the urge to use precious blockchain space as a communication channel. With just 32 bytes,...

> It can't be ephemeral and therefore unverifiable in the future. Why would an atomic swap need to be verifiable forever? Once the swap is completed, the metadata become irrelevant....