Re: Cryptographic evidence of archival existence in time (but not authenticity)

Quote from: nullius on March 29, 2021, 12:31:16 PM

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on March 29, 2021, 11:24:15 AM

Depending on why OP need to prove it's unchanged, website archive service is good enough. An example, Archive.org's Wayback Machine is legit legal evidence, US appeals court judges rule.
For most other cases, archive the website on multiple archive services is good enough. It's not likely multiple operator going to edit same archived website.

I don’t care what some American court (or really, any court) says. It is not cryptographically secure.

I never say it's cryptographically secure and we don't know if OP need solution which is cryptographically secure or highly provable.

Quote from: Quickseller on March 29, 2021, 08:23:19 PM

The reason OP_RETURN transactions are valid is to allow people to store data in the blockchain.

People don't need OP_RETURN to store data on blockchain. IMO the main reason of OP_RETURN creation isn't to allow storing data on blockchain, but prevent UTXO bloat which slightly reduce resource to run full node.