I would like to propose two things that are closely related. I will start making BIPS if there's positive feedback. Sorry it's so long, but I felt both should be in the same email...

_*(1) Signature Blocks* -- A more-robust, versatile, message-signing exchange_

Satoshi client 0.6.0 introduced message signing, but I've been fairly unimpressed with the implementation. Strictly speaking, it works, but it's really not intended for "regular users." There is no indication of what message was signed or what address signed it. Key recovery works for the computers processing it, but the user has no idea what this chunk of random data is. They don't even know if the message they thought they signed is what's in the signature (along the lines of the copy&paste virus, the message could be switched out without the user noticing).

I have implemented Signature Blocks <https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=56424.msg776163#msg776163> in Armory (as of v0.55), which is a fully-functional expansion on the idea. Along the lines of BIP 10, a signature block is a human-readable chunk of data that immediately identifies the address and the message that are being signed. It is easily copy&pasted via email or text files, and is fairly compact for visual identification. Click the link above to see an example signature block and an Armory screenshot of the UI (which needs improvement, but still usable). The verification process will include:

-- Check that the public key (included or recovered) matches the address field. -- Verify that the signature matches the included message for this public key -- The message is properly formatted with a standardized character set and escape/replacement scheme for things like newlines or double-quotes.

gmaxwell already pointed out that key recovery makes the "Public Key" field pointless. Okay fine -- I just don't have key recovery implemented yet in Armory, and when I do I can ditch that field (or simply make it optional). The point is to create a versatile, human-readable standardized form, much like the BIP 0010 signature-collection scheme <https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0010>.


_*(2) Sign-Message URI scheme***-- Request signed messages from users using URIs_

I had the idea that for certain services, the first funding address could be used to identify the owner of an account, and all account maintenance (such as cashouts) be done through signed messages with this address. For instance, the user would need both a login password *and* a signed message in order to make a withdrawal or purchase:

("Please withdraw 12.3 BTC from acct 1828349132 to address 1Hfr3jk2093f")_signed_by_A

This gives the service the ability to use two separate factors to authenticate the request (username&password *and* access to unencrypted wallet). This /could/ work with manual signature blocks alone... but it's too many steps for regular users. However, I think it's workable if we expand bitcoin URIs to include "Signature Requests".

The URI scheme would add a few parameters to the scheme, and would have to have further replacement rules to make sure that messages are handled properly. The general CONOPs would be (*Con*cept of *Op*eration*s*):

    -- User navigates to "Withdraw funds" on webpage
-- Webpage has you fill in the details: from-account, to-address, withdrawal amount -- Webpage produces a clickable URI link that loads all the information into your client, including addr-reqd-for-sig -- Client asks for confirmation and passphrase (if necessary) then produces a signature (and sig block if necessary) -- URI may include reply-to field that tells it where to send the siganture when it's ready

So the extra tags that would be needed would probably be:

        "*requestSig*=True":
                Flag to identify that this is a signing request URI
        "*sigNeeded*=1Qjf3392k31h"
                The address that needs to sign the message
"*message*=Please%20withdraw%2012.3%20BTC%20to%20addr%201Hfr3jk2093f" Some encoding of the message that can be parsed the same way on all systems
        "*replyurl*=http://requestor.com/sig_replies.asp?";
(Optional) After signing, application will submit the signature to the replyurl

The reply url could be simply an http URL which will use bitcoin URI syntax, with the fields above copied. Therefore, to complete the above request, the application handling the request will simply send an HTTP request to:

http://requestor.com/sig_replies.asp?*sigNeeded*=1Qjf3392k31h&*message*=...&*signature*=1fb1893ac193...&*replySig*=True

Any thoughts?  (I have no doubts that there are :) )

-Alan





------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second 
resolution app monitoring today. Free.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

Reply via email to