pull down to refresh
0 sats \ 2 replies \ @justin_shocknet 11 Nov \ on: The Lightning Custody Spectrum - Your Keys, Not Your Coins? lightning
Definitely lots of trustodial dog shit out their larping as self-custody, and I like the idea of a signer being a more secure device than a node on the open internet, but given there's inherently an interactivity requirement on behalf of the signer I'm still not clear what VLS's complexity actually achieves.
Greenlight has always seemed like another dumb thing downstream of the mobile node fantasy and trying to loophole the regulator, from the geniuses that call Liquid an L2.
As I understand it, the node handles most of the complex, high-risk stuff: gossip, routing, channel management, networking. The signer just validates and signs. By moving that logic onto a separate, hardened device, you can cut down the attack surface compared to everything running inside one node process.
You can also split signing roles: one signer that’s always on for receiving, and another that only turns on when you want to send or close channels. That isn’t possible with a monolithic node.
reply
Indeed, and I like that angle, but that's a systems/network security thing not a trust thing.
The problem with greenlight specifically is that its geared towards mobile nodes to make them lighter, while Lightning still has an interactivity requirement by nature for state updates, and phones are probably less secure for holding secrets than a hardened server.
reply