__
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
--
Andy Alness
Software Engineer
Coinbase
San Francisco, CA
--
raversal of the P2P protocol. It seems
> reasonable especially for "inv" messages.
>
> On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 2:46 PM, Andy Alness wrote:
>> Has there ever been serious discussion on extending the protocol to
>> support UDP transport? That would allow for NAT traver
Selenium testing platform available
> Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free."
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs
> ___
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://l
>
> It sounds OK to me, although we should all sleep on it for a bit. The
> reason this header exists is exactly because mobile code fetching random
> web resources can result in surprising security holes.
>
That's fair. From the server perspective, I'd argue that payment requests /
payments alrea
Would it be a terrible idea to amend BIP 70 to suggest implementors include
a "Access-Control-Allow-Origin: *" response header for their payment
request responses? I don't think this opens up any useful attack vectors.
I ask because this would make it practical for pure HTML5 web wallets to
use th
5 matches
Mail list logo
