On 1 November 2013 22:47, Tony Arcieri <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Maxim Kammerer <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> But since you are asking, safe human-readable addresses are not possible >> as a concept, unless >> you are willing to trust a third party. > > > Aaron Swartz wrote a great blog post about "Squaring Zooko's Triangle", an > idea which has more or less been implemented in terms of Namecoin: > > http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/squarezooko > > tl;dr: a Bitcoin-like global append-only log can enable the secure mapping > of human-meaningful names to cryptographic keys
I'm sorry to bang on about it, but, if you want an append-only log, there are ways to implement it that are both far more efficient than Bitcoin _and_ are truly append-only (Bitcoin is only kinda append-only, until someone comes along with a longer, different "append-only" log). For example, the one we use for Certificate Transparency. But really, what you want for mappings of names to keys is a verifiable map, not an append-only log. An append-only log requires everyone to download the whole log. A verifiable map does not. We describe two ways to make verifiable maps here: http://www.links.org/files/RevocationTransparency.pdf (described in the context of revocation, but it is obvious how you'd extend it to any mapping). I was hoping to get CT finished before I started to figure out how to implement verifiable maps, but I guess I should perhaps get on with it. -- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at [email protected].
