Could you describe what exactly BWS does?
Sure. BWS tasks are:
* Coordinate Transaction proposals in multisignature wallets: provide
an 'always connected' node to distribute pending transaction proposals
and receive the signatures from peers.
* Coordinate and store BIP32 derivation indexes.
It sounds like the main issue is this is a web wallet server of some kind.
If the clients were SPV then they'd be checking their own balances and
downloading their own tx history, which would mean the coordination tasks
could be done by storing encrypted blobs on the server rather than the
server
As soon as that PaymentRequest leaves the wallet on its way to the hotel
server, it is up for grabs
Is it? I'm assuming TLS is being used here. And the hotel server also has a
copy of the PaymentRequest, as the hotel actually issued it and that's how
they're deciding the receipt is valid. So
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/2015 04:48 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
That would be rather new and tricky legal territory.
But even putting the legal issues to one side, there are
definitional issues.
For instance if the Chainalysis nodes started following the
protocol
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Given the recent news about Chainanalysis
(https://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/2yvy6b/a_regulatory_compliance_service_is_sybil/),
and other companies who are disrupting the Bitcoin network
Hi all,
I've been thinking about how a person can prove that she has made a
payment. I came up with an idea I call Proof of Payment (PoP) and I would
highly appreciate your comments. Has something like this been discussed
somewhere before?
*Use cases*
There are several scenarios in which it
That would be rather new and tricky legal territory.
But even putting the legal issues to one side, there are definitional
issues.
For instance if the Chainalysis nodes started following the protocol specs
better and became just regular nodes that happen to keep logs, would that
still be a
I'm not talking about keeping logs, I mean purporting to be a network
peer in order to gain a connection slot and then not behaving as one
(not relaying transactions)
That definition would include all SPV clients?
I get what you are trying to do. It just seems extremely tricky.
Den 13 mar 2015 20:57 skrev Kalle Rosenbaum ka...@rosenbaum.se:
Hi all,
I've been thinking about how a person can prove that she has made a
payment. I came up with an idea I call Proof of Payment (PoP) and I would
highly appreciate your comments. Has something like this been discussed
Hi Kalle,
I think you're thinking along the right lines, but I am skeptical that this
protocol adds much. A saved payment request is meant to be unique per
transaction e.g. because the destination address is unique for that payment
(for privacy reasons). Where would you store the signed payment
You are killing us Mike! :) We really don't like to think that BWS is
a webwallet. Note
that private keys are not stored (not even encrypted) at the server.
Sure, sorry, by web wallet I meant a blockchain.info/CoPay type setup where
the client has the private keys and signs txns, but
Hi
No I don't agree with the analysis.
Yes, the PaymentRequest can be stored with the same security as the private
keys are stored. The big difference is that the keys never leave the
wallet. As soon as that PaymentRequest leaves the wallet on its way to the
hotel server, it is up for grabs
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 03/13/2015 05:08 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
That definition would include all SPV clients?
Don't SPV clients announce their intentions by the act of uploading a
filter?
I get what you are trying to do. It just seems extremely tricky.
Certainly
Don't SPV clients announce their intentions by the act of uploading a
filter?
Well they don't set NODE_NETWORK, so they don't claim to be providing
network services. But then I guess the Chainalysis nodes could easily just
clear that bit flag too.
What I'd actually like to see is for
14 matches
Mail list logo
