Timed out transactions as a Taker


#1

I have had 4 transactions time out, which has resulted in the loss of fees, and one transaction which went smooth.

I don’t care too much about the loss of funds, but the software is quite unusable. It’s a shame because I was using it about 12 months ago and it was seamless

attahced here is the log file;

https://file.io/ZY32F5


#2

strange… I’ve just been able to make another trade, I’m not 100% sure but I think the time out errors are isolated to when I try and trade with the peer ‘mees6l2zz3zwh2u7.onion’,

others seem to be fine. Any idea why? And how I can stop from seeing these poorly connected peers?


#3

p.p.s It would be great if bisq had an encrypted chat function for those with listings,

also how come bisq doesn’t have segwit, since all is on chain, minimizing fees should be a massive priority, I couldn’t even withdraw to my bech32 accounts!


#4

Yeah, it should be fixed with the next release. Hopefully we will see a lot less of these issues in the future :slight_smile:

You can add peers to the ignore list in the Settings, if you suspect it has something to do with the other peer.

As for segwit, this is due to Bisq relying on a bitcoinj library that hasn’t implemented it yet. Hopefully they will either add it or we might switch to some alternative.

Chatting with other peers has been left out on purpose for a while now, to minimize risk of social engineering, but we often have users request this from time to time.


#5

Oh that’s understandable, whenever I see a legacy address the jerk reaction is to assume foul play because of all the fee drama. :slight_smile:

I can understand about the social engineering aspect, we would hope those who have gotten this far with working out the elements of a DEX that they should have their wits about them.

Lastly, I must say, the setup is quite a nightmare for privacy, in terms of crossing coin inputs. As it exists where the security deposit is included in the transaction with sold coins, it creates a cross of inputs and destroys fungability. Traditional exchanges at least act as a big pool.
Coinshuffle was previously on the roadmap, any idea why it has been removed?


#6

I am not sure, maybe it is something to do with limited dev resources we have at the moment.
It is hard to implement these things in Bitcoin currently I would assume.
You can always exchange your bitcoins for Monero and then exchange them back if you are worried you are being tracked, that could help out a bit, although you will always need a security deposit in BTC.


#7

Unfortunately the idea that you can do BTC > XMR > BTC to give some kind of security is seriously flawed.

Especially on a platform like this where the funds are moved directly from one party to another,

say I am a political activist, in my country I expose corruption, maybe it’s right, maybe it’s not, but I want to protect myself and those who have donated to support me.

I come here and exchange my XMR for BTC, but the person who sent those BTC is a far greater criminal who is looking to buy XMR to cover his tracks. According to chain analysis it simply appears the coins moved from opint A to B and suddenly it’s al eyes on me.

So these kind of platforms are far worse than traditional exchanges for privacy, which need to be addressed to see adoption


#8

You are right about that, you could always get coins with even worse history.

Coin mixer do the same thing, unfortunately there is no right way to deal with this in Bitcoin, as far as I know. It is more of a political problem, than anything. I am not sure what we could do here to solve the problem. I guess if government wants to treat some coins differently, those coins will always have a hard time to matter where they end up.


#9

Great criminal means great money.
Given the amount limits in Bisq, Bisq is at the moment not a very pratical tool to launder great money.