1 sat \ 2 replies \ @0388215539 23 Feb 2022 \ on: LightningEscrow Demo Video - Beta V1 bitcoin
So help me understand here, is this 100% non-custodial? I've seen one example of a p2p trading tool using hodl invoices p2plnbot, but as far as I understand there's a very short period of time in which the server is acting as a custodial of funds in there.
How is this setup different?
The server never takes custody of funds, not even for a second (unlike p2plnbot), but I hesitate to use the phrase "100% non-custodial" on what is essentially a 2-of-3 multisig.
From the buyer's perspective, the moment you hit "send" on your wallet you no longer have control over that money. It is now contractually locked in an htlc where the seller can take the money if the escrow gives him the preimage, or -- if the escrow does not give the seller the preimage -- the payment will time out within 2 weeks and the buyer will get his money back.
I'm not sure what to call that. It's not "100% non custodial" because you, the buyer, no longer control what happens to the money. It's also not "100% controlled by the seller" because he can't take the money without help from the escrow. It's also not custodied by the escrow at all, not even for a second, because all the server is doing is giving a preimage to the seller or withholding it.
The term Unchained Capital uses for their similar setup is "collaborative custody." That is the term that I think fits best.
reply
Cool.
Now the terms "custodial" or "non-custodial" are always put from the perspective of the service provider. You're custodial if you can, at any point in time run away with the money. You're non-custodial if that possibility simply does't exist.
As I understand here, you're non-custodial because you act as just any hop in the payment path.
reply