HIP35: RF Metadata Sidechannel

[jamiew]

Author(s): @wavesoft, @dmamalis
Start Date: 2021-07-28
Category: Technical
Initial PR: #249
Tracking Issue: this
Status: In Discussion
Discord channel: #hip-35-rf-metadata-sidechannel

Rendered view:

https://github.com/helium/HIP/blob/master/0035-safe-rf-metadata-side-channel.md

Summary:

Introduces a new side-channel from which RF metadata can be collected, in a way that no sensitive information
can be disclosed to third parties.

[jamiew]

@wavesoft @dmamalis is this proposal still active? It is a very cool idea, but since it does not require chain-level work, I'm not sure if it needs to be a formal HIP – you could implement this independently. The grants committee has also expressed interest in proposals like this that improve security and visibility into chain data.

[wavesoft]

Hello @jamiew yes, the proposal is still active, wasn't very sure how to continue 😄

The reason for having it as a HIP is twofold:

1. It was for the community to see it and review it, and/or contribute whatever modifications they might want to approve.
2. Indeed it's not implemented in the chain, but it suggests (side-channel) modifications to core components that might need higher approval.

If you think it's a good idea, I can follow-up with a PR on the gateway logic (eg. on gateway-rs) with a reference implementation so we can discuss over?

[vincenzospaghetti]

Hi @wavesoft @dmamalis , This HIP has been open for some time without any noticeable action. We are going to move to close this HIP. Please let us know if there is a reason not to.
We will close this by the end of the week (10/28).

[wavesoft]

Hello @vincenzospaghetti , we are more than eager to follow this HIP through, we are not certain however on what the next actions should be.

We had some discussions with a few stakeholders in Helium and we didn't have a clear idea how what feature could be moved forward. The discussions reached a stalemate when there was some misunderstanding about where/how this feature could be implemented, and how the billing strategies should apply. There was even a suggestion that "buying all traffic" is already a similar mechanism - that we strongly disagree.

But we are happy to bring the discussions back and reach a consensus and finally implement it. How would you recommend we should move forward?

[vincenzospaghetti]

Hi @wavesoft - That's great to hear. Let's take this conversation back into the open discussion channel then(#hip-35-metadata-sidechannel).

I suggest restarting that conversation by providing a summary of the following:

1. Your original proposal
2. The feedback to date
3. Impacts to this proposal from any recently passed HIPs (notably HIP 70: Scaling the Helium Network #471)
4. Remaining questions: What is still outstanding? What still needs to be answered?

I'll look around the discord to see your response! Let's start the energy around this again.

[vincenzospaghetti]

Hi @wavesoft - There's still been no movement on this HIP, so we are going to close it. Please feel free to reopen as a PR with your updated proposal. Thanks for your time and effort and for contributing to the Helium community!