Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Mike Hearn
(for background: I did a lot of the design work with Gavin on the payment protocol and suggested/prototyped using x.509 in the way we do). So, I'm not a fan of weird hacks involving non-existent domain names. There's a clean way to implement this and we decided to punt on it for v1 in order to get

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Timo Hanke
> So, I'm not a fan of weird hacks involving non-existent domain names. > There's a clean way to implement this and we decided to punt on it for > v1 in order to get something shippable, but if you're volunteering ... > :) then indeed having a custom cert type that chains onto the end is > the way

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Mike Hearn
> Chaining a custom cert onto the end doesn't work, at least not if your > "end" is the SSL cert. Chaining it to the SSL cert defeats the OP's > intention of "cold signing", as the SSL private key is usually kept > online, therefore can't be used to sign a pubkey that is supposed to > stay offline.

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Timo Hanke
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:05:06PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: > Chaining a custom cert onto the end doesn't work, at least not if your > "end" is the SSL cert. Chaining it to the SSL cert defeats the OP's > intention of "cold signing", as the SSL private key is usually kept > online,

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Mike Hearn
> > > That's a pointless goal to try and solve right now, because the SSL > > PKI cannot handle compromised web servers and so neither can we (with > > v1 of the payments spec). > > I don't think the OP intended to solve it "right now", i.e. in v1. > > He differentiated between "most trusted" and "

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Mike Hearn
> > So I don't see how you can have a payment request signing key that's safer > than an SSL key. As Jeremy notes, CAs will not issue you intermediate > certificates. Perhaps if one existed that would do the necessary things for > a reasonable price you could indeed give yourself an offline interme

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Timo Hanke
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 12:45:33PM +0200, Mike Hearn wrote: > > That's a pointless goal to try and solve right now, because the SSL > > PKI cannot handle compromised web servers and so neither can we (with > > v1 of the payments spec). > > I don't think the OP intended to solve it

Re: [Bitcoin-development] [Bitcoin-test] Time for a 0.8.2 release

2013-04-25 Thread Arklan Uth Oslin
unfortunately my winter has proven a complicated series of significant life events - new work, etc - which sees me with little free time to help out. sorry. Arklan -- As long as there is light, the darkness holds no fear. And yet, even in the deepest black, there is life. - Arklan Uth Os

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Mike Hearn
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:13 PM, Mike Caldwell wrote: > I am not sure if my replies hit the list. If not, can anyone who sees this > help? > > In the past, I have pre signed (with PGP) large batches of Bitcoin > addresses for distribution on my server. This way, even in the event of > compromise,

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Jeremy Spilman
There are definitely ways to keep the pay-to address secure even if the web server is compromised, just perhaps not perfectly clean standard X.509 ways under the current ecosystem which would be easier for everyone to agree on. - If a more trusted cert is an EV end cert, and a less trusted is a D

Re: [Bitcoin-development] Cold Signing Payment Requests

2013-04-25 Thread Gavin Andresen
On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 3:12 PM, Jeremy Spilman wrote: > Right now I'm leaning towards writing a prototype using a single cert with > a fingerprint of PubKey in the Subject Alternate Name, and getting PubKey > and InvoiceID in the Payment Request. Gavin, would the best way to work on > this be to