Hello everybody,
A question: what prevents mediators and arbitrators from dealing with one of the two sides in exchange for a part of the “booty”?
Or even, what prevents a mediators or an arbitrators from giving reason to himself using another computer from which he carries out transactions?
I feel obliged to specify however, that I have completed numerous transactions with a lot of satisfaction on Bisq and that the very few times that unfortunately the other party forced me to deal with mediators and arbitrators, they behaved more than very well and honestly.
Hi @Lung welcome to Bisq.
What prevents mediators and arbitrators from dealing with one of the two sides in exchange for a part of the “booty”?
Moderators must put up a bond of 10,000 BSQ for the role. If they were found to be colluding with one party or being dishonest they would risk losing some or all of their BSQ bond.
Arbitrators do not have to put up a BSQ bond: Arbitrator - Bisq Wiki
I assume this is because they refund users from their own funds and then make a request to the DAO for compensation. If they were making false claims this would put their own funds at risk.
Also as both mediators and arbitrators are compensated for their roles they would quickly find themselves out of a role if they participated in any nefarious activity relating to their roles.
Also remember the funds are locked in a 2 of 2 multi-sig and neither the mediators or arbitrators have access to these keys. The only people that control them are the traders. This means neither the mediator or arbitrator can ‘spend’ the users btc without their consent. If, in the case of dispute, traders cannot agree compensation amounts funds are sent to a donation address. Neither the arbitrators or mediators have access to these funds.
Thank you for your reply, it is very comfortable. From it it is clear that if the mediators and referees behave badly, they risk several money.
But forgive me if I insist, there is a point that I can’t understand: if I create a BTC purchase offer for 100k EUR, a mediator / arbitrator sees it, he takes the other computer on which he has already used successful Bisq in the past, he accepts the offer, loads its cryptos, I make the wire transfer, he waits a week after which he opens a mediation and an arbitration with which he was rightfully managing to keep both my euros and his BTC? Is there something in these steps that can prevent it from?
The burningman (Donation Address Owner - Bisq Wiki) could take its own offers and proceed with the scam you’re thinking about. He’s a highly trusted role, has the biggest bonded role at Bisq but still, the amount of BSQ bonded can’t compensate the possible damage it could cause.
To remove this single point of failure that this necessary role owner generates, I consider two ways:
- Go full Mutual Assured Destruction Model, by burning all the funds into dispute in case peers don’t agree to a payout. This option is as cyberpunk as hell, but still not very popular as there is blackmail risk from the part who has less to lose, so it’s considered too risky. Send arbitration funds to a burning address instead of BTC donation address. · Issue #135 · bisq-network/proposals · GitHub
- Use smart contracts and Automatic Market Makers protocol: The burningman would be replaced by a smart contract receiving the BTC from disputes and would sell those BTC for BSQ and burn them. I find this solution great, but it still has a lot of technical challenges. Implementing Bisq DAO with RSK · Issue #276 · bisq-network/proposals · GitHub and Investigations for a new trade protocol · Discussion #5430 · bisq-network/bisq · GitHub
In the example above, the problems for the mediator to pull this scam off would be as follows:
- If the trader does not send you BTC then all funds are sent to the burningman and both the trader and yourself would then explain what happened to the arbitrator. You would have to demonstrate evidence of sent funds to the arbitrator. On seeing the evidence they should send the BTC to yourself, plus an amount for your inconvenience of being made to wait.
- For the above not to happen the arbitrator would have to be in on the scam and collude with the mediator. If that happened you would be able to make an appeal the the DAO for a refund in BSQ.
As @MnM says the bigger risk if the burningman runs off with the funds. However it is important to remember that in the instance you describe if the burningman was to run off with the funds then you would still receive payment as normal from the refund agent / arbitrator, so the burningman would be stealing from the Bisq DAO rather than an individual user.
Thanks for your answers!
You are reassuring me a lot, I must admit.
At this point I would like to ask both of you a question: what is, approximately, the maximum amount (in fiat currency) that you have purchased (if you ever have) through Bisq?
Or: what is the maximum amount (in fiat currency) that would allow you to feel “safe” by making a purchase on Bisq?
Thank you again for the clarifications, and I apologize in case I may be annoying or suspicious, I do it only because I intend to use Bisq for important amounts soon, and I would like to have as much security as possible.
1 Like
Thanks for your answers!
You are reassuring me a lot, I must admit.
At this point I would like to ask both of you a question: what is, approximately, the maximum amount (in fiat currency) that you have purchased (if you ever have) through Bisq?
Or: what is the maximum amount (in fiat currency) that would allow you to feel “safe” by making a purchase on Bisq?
A question instead only for @Pazza .
In problem number one of the mediator, which you set out, you rightly say that then we should both prove to the arbitrator that we have paid the other party. So I ask you: since PageSigner does not work with any of the browsers I tested and with none of the bank accounts owned by me, it would be enough, for example, a video of the screen while I enter the account used to make the payment to try at 100% to the arbitrator that I have paid my counterpart?
Instead, as regards the second problem you set out: is it always 100% sure that mediator and arbitrator are two different people?
Thank you again for the clarifications, and I apologize in case I may be annoying or suspicious, I do it only because I intend to use Bisq for important amounts soon, and I would like to have as much security as possible.
At this point I would like to ask both of you a question: what is, approximately, the maximum amount (in fiat currency) that you have purchased (if you ever have) through Bisq?
The maximum amount you can generally purchase for fiat is 0.25 BTC. This is per trade. You can make as many trades as you like. Not sure giving my personal specifics is required!!
Or: what is the maximum amount (in fiat currency) that would allow you to feel “safe” by making a purchase on Bisq?
Bisq is super safe. I trust it more than my banks. I think the question is what amount of fiat would you be comfortable sending / receiving in fiat with your bank.
A question instead only for @Pazza .
In problem number one of the mediator, which you set out, you rightly say that then we should both prove to the arbitrator that we have paid the other party. So I ask you: since PageSigner does not work with any of the browsers I tested and with none of the bank accounts owned by me, it would be enough, for example, a video of the screen while I enter the account used to make the payment to try at 100% to the arbitrator that I have paid my counterpart?
Yes, that would be acceptable. It would be more than the other party can provide if they are falsifying a transaction
Instead, as regards the second problem you set out: is it always 100% sure that mediator and arbitrator are two different people?
The arbitrator is anonymous, his/her identity is not known.
Thanks for all your answers!! I’m much calmer now.
Among other things, I did not know that the identity of the arbitrator was unknown… Great, you have thought of everything! 
1 Like