e742cd5192
This PR continues work from PR #158 and PR #173, and introduces a new **Section 9: Security Considerations** to the Mix Protocol RFC. It formalizes the protocol’s core guarantees, trust assumptions, and known limitations. ### New Section Added Structured Section 9 with the following subsections: - [x] **9.1 Security Guarantees of the Core Mix Protocol** Defines sender anonymity, metadata protection, and statelessness guarantees. - [x] **9.2 Exit Node Trust Model** Trust assumptions at the final hop: - [x] `9.2.1 Message Delivery and Origin Trust` - [x] `9.2.2 Origin Protocol Trust and Client Role Abuse` - [x] **9.3 Destination as Final Hop** Optional deployment model where the destination operates its own Mix instance to eliminate exit-level trust. - [x] **9.4 Known Protocol Limitations** Clearly outlines out-of-scope threats: - Undetectable node misbehavior - Lack of built-in retries or acknowledgments - No Sybil resistance - Vulnerability to DoS attacks ### Key Improvements - Clearly delineates what the Mix Protocol guarantees and what it leaves to external systems. - Formalizes the exit trust boundary, a key concept for downstream applications. - Introduces an alternative destination participation model. - Enables future discussions around accountability, reliability, and Sybil resistance. --------- Co-authored-by: Prem Chaitanya Prathi <chaitanyaprem@gmail.com>
Vac Request For Comments(RFC)
NOTE: This repo is WIP. We are currently restructuring the RFC process.
This repository contains specifications from the Waku, Nomos, Codex, and Status projects that are part of the IFT portfolio. Vac is an IFT service that will manage the RFC, Request for Comments, process within this repository.
New RFC Process
This repository replaces the previous rfc.vac.dev resource.
Each project will maintain initial specifications in separate repositories,
which may be considered as a raw specification.
All Vac raw specifications and
discussions will live in the Vac subdirectory.
When projects have reached some level of maturity
for a specification living in their repository,
the process of updating the status to draft may begin in this repository.
Specifications will adhere to
1/COSS before obtaining draft status.
Implementations should follow specifications as described, and all contributions will be discussed before the stable status is obtained. The goal of this RFC process will to engage all interseted parities and reach a rough consensus for techcinal specifications.
Contributing
Please see 1/COSS for general guidelines and specification lifecycle.
Feel free to join the Vac discord.
Here's the project board used by core contributors and maintainers: Projects
IFT Projects' Raw Specifications
The repository for each project raw specifications: