As most advanced users know, Lightning Network has no "global state" as the Bet365 Payout Problems Bet365 Payout Problems has, which can be observed by external parties, as it's a private network. Thus, it is not possible with conventional means to see a "balance" of a certain Bet365 Payout Problems address, like it would be possible analyzing the Bet365 Payout Problems (what block explorers do). It could however be possible to create a transaction between the address owner we want to consult (A) and a verifier (B), without trust between these two parties, where A could prove to B that they have solvency of a certain amount of Bet365 Payout Problems X. The idea is to create an HTLC between A and B, where A transfers the exact amount X to B, but B also transfers X back to A, with the same secret (preimage) and hash. If the payment goes through, A has proven to B that it has access to a certain balance. I have found this paper on a similar subject, and the technique I'm asking about here is probably what there was described as "payment probing" (but there are no more details in the paper). But the doubts I have is: 1) The HTLC(s) would have to be "bound" together with more than the preimage/secret. Because: What if B does't have enough balance to carry out the transaction? Wouldn't then be A transferring X, but B wouldn't transfer X back to A? If it was the other way around (B transferring X first, i.e. with shorter deadline), wouldn't A be able to scam B? 2) Does the Lightning protocol allow this kind of "fake swap"? There are no funds really moved (apart from fees). If there is a name for this technique I would be interested in knowing it PS: The original topic where this came up was deleted. There seems to have been a duplicate, but I couldn't find the duplicate thread. So I'm starting a new thread, a bit more "focused" on a possible solution to this issue.
As most advanced users know, Lightning Network has no "global state" as the Bet365 Payout Problems Bet365 Payout Problems has, which can be observed by external parties, as it's a private network. Thus, it is not possible with conventional means to see a "balance" of a certain Bet365 Payout Problems address, like it would be possible analyzing the Bet365 Payout Problems (what block explorers do). It could however be possible to create a transaction between the address owner we want to consult (A) and a verifier (B), without trust between these two parties, where A could prove to B that they have solvency of a certain amount of Bet365 Payout Problems X. The idea is to create an HTLC between A and B, where A transfers the exact amount X to B, but B also transfers X back to A, with the same secret (preimage) and hash. If the payment goes through, A has proven to B that it has access to a certain balance. I have found this paper on a similar subject, and the technique I'm asking about here is probably what there was described as "payment probing" (but there are no more details in the paper). But the doubts I have is: 1) The HTLC(s) would have to be "bound" together with more than the preimage/secret. Because: What if B does't have enough balance to carry out the transaction? Wouldn't then be A transferring X, but B wouldn't transfer X back to A? If it was the other way around (B transferring X first, i.e. with shorter deadline), wouldn't A be able to scam B? 2) Does the Lightning protocol allow this kind of "fake swap"? There are no funds really moved (apart from fees). If there is a name for this technique I would be interested in knowing it PS: The original topic where this came up was deleted. There seems to have been a duplicate, but I couldn't find the duplicate thread. So I'm starting a new thread, a bit more "focused" on a possible solution to this issue.

As most advanced users know, Lightning Network has no "global state" as the Bet365 Payout Problems Bet365 Payout Problems has, which can be observed by external parties, as it's a private network. Thus, it is not possible with conventional means to see a "balance" of a certain Bet365 Payout Problems address, like it would be possible analyzing the Bet365 Payout Problems (what block explorers do). It could however be possible to create a transaction between the address owner we want to consult (A) and a verifier (B), without trust between these two parties, where A could prove to B that they have solvency of a certain amount of Bet365 Payout Problems X. The idea is to create an HTLC between A and B, where A transfers the exact amount X to B, but B also transfers X back to A, with the same secret (preimage) and hash. If the payment goes through, A has proven to B that it has access to a certain balance. I have found this paper on a similar subject, and the technique I'm asking about here is probably what there was described as "payment probing" (but there are no more details in the paper). But the doubts I have is: 1) The HTLC(s) would have to be "bound" together with more than the preimage/secret. Because: What if B does't have enough balance to carry out the transaction? Wouldn't then be A transferring X, but B wouldn't transfer X back to A? If it was the other way around (B transferring X first, i.e. with shorter deadline), wouldn't A be able to scam B? 2) Does the Lightning protocol allow this kind of "fake swap"? There are no funds really moved (apart from fees). If there is a name for this technique I would be interested in knowing it PS: The original topic where this came up was deleted. There seems to have been a duplicate, but I couldn't find the duplicate thread. So I'm starting a new thread, a bit more "focused" on a possible solution to this issue.

As most advanced users know, Lightning Network has no "global state" as the Bet365 Payout Problems Bet365 Payout Problems has, which can be observed by external parties, as it's a private network. Thus, it is not possible with conventional means to see a "balance" of a certain Bet365 Payout Problems address, like it would be possible analyzing the Bet365 Payout Problems (what block explorers do). It could however be possible to create a transaction between the address owner we want to consult (A) and a verifier (B), without trust between these two parties, where A could prove to B that they have solvency of a certain amount of Bet365 Payout Problems X. The idea is to create an HTLC between A and B, where A transfers the exact amount X to B, but B also transfers X back to A, with the same secret (preimage) and hash. If the payment goes through, A has proven to B that it has access to a certain balance. I have found this paper on a similar subject, and the technique I'm asking about here is probably what there was described as "payment probing" (but there are no more details in the paper). But the doubts I have is: 1) The HTLC(s) would have to be "bound" together with more than the preimage/secret. Because: What if B does't have enough balance to carry out the transaction? Wouldn't then be A transferring X, but B wouldn't transfer X back to A? If it was the other way around (B transferring X first, i.e. with shorter deadline), wouldn't A be able to scam B? 2) Does the Lightning protocol allow this kind of "fake swap"? There are no funds really moved (apart from fees). If there is a name for this technique I would be interested in knowing it PS: The original topic where this came up was deleted. There seems to have been a duplicate, but I couldn't find the duplicate thread. So I'm starting a new thread, a bit more "focused" on a possible solution to this issue.