On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 01:07:46PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> namecoin + SIN[1] or namecoin + PGP identity.
Is namecoin actively maintained these days?
roy
--
___
Bitcoin-de
namecoin + SIN[1] or namecoin + PGP identity.
[1] https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Identity_protocol_v1
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 6:21 AM, vv01f wrote:
> Some users on bitcointalk[0] would like to have their vanity addresses
> available for others easily to find and verify the ownership over a kind
> of
The idea was not to register profiles or any human identity, or associate it
with any other identity directly. Neither was it to have a massive BlockChain,
or use proof of work. In this case proof of work is detrimental to security -
you want as many people to know about your keys as quickly as
This sounds like Namecoin. You can already register profiles with it,
including keypairs. onename.io is a web-based client you can use to
register on the Namecoin blockchain.
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Chris D'Costa wrote:
> Security of transmission of person-to-person pay-to addresses is o
Security of transmission of person-to-person pay-to addresses is one of the use
cases that we are addressing on our hardware wallet.
I have yet to finish the paper but in a nutshell it uses a decentralised ledger
of, what we refer to as, "device keys".
These keys are not related in any way to
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:21:03PM +0200, vv01f wrote:
> Some users on bitcointalk[0] would like to have their vanity addresses
> available for others easily to find and verify the ownership over a kind
> of WoT. Right now they sign their own addresses and quote them in the
> forums.
> As I pointed
Does't BIP70 cover this already via Certificate Authorities?
On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 12:21 PM, vv01f wrote:
> Some users on bitcointalk[0] would like to have their vanity addresses
> available for others easily to find and verify the ownership over a kind
> of WoT. Right now they sign their own a
Some users on bitcointalk[0] would like to have their vanity addresses
available for others easily to find and verify the ownership over a kind
of WoT. Right now they sign their own addresses and quote them in the
forums.
As I pointed out there already the centralized storage in the forums is
not s
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 12:07:04PM +0100, Mike Hearn wrote:
> Though I am loathe to go back and redesign this part of BIP 70 so soon
> after we shipped v1, it seems to me like the refund feature may be hard to
> implement on phones if there's no time limit for when you can receive a
> refund. Other
A while ago I created a patch to make it possible to bind the RPC port to a
specific address or even multiple address/port pairs.
https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/3695
I'm fairly confident that it works, but it cannot hurt if some people that
need this functionality tested it before merge.
10 matches
Mail list logo
