On 07/03/15 16:53, Mem Wallet wrote:
> this allows a user to manage a GPG identity for encryption
> and signing with zero bytes of permanent storage. (on tails for example)


As an author of BIP44 I don't think that you should use BIP44 for this
and a new BIP number should be allocated. To me it does not make much
sense to create GPG key hierarchy per Bitcoin account, but rather create
a GPG key hierarchy per device/master seed.

I am currently in process of implementing a SignIdentity message for
TREZOR, which will be used for HTTPS/SSH/etc. logins.

See PoC here:

The idea is to derive the BIP32 path from HTTPS/SSH URI (by hashing it
and use m/46'/a'/b'/c'/d' where a,b,c,d are first 4*32 bits of the hash)
and use that to derive the private key. This scheme might work for GPG
keys (just use gpg://u...@host.com for the URI) as well.

Best Regards / S pozdravom,

Pavol Rusnak <st...@gk2.sk>

Dive into the World of Parallel Programming The Go Parallel Website, sponsored
by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is your hub for all
things parallel software development, from weekly thought leadership blogs to
news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a look and join the 
conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
Bitcoin-development mailing list

Reply via email to