Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1F239F0 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:39 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from APC01-PU1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-oln040092254099.outbound.protection.outlook.com [40.92.254.99]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD887405 for ; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:37 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=live.com; s=selector1; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=cBBugsblGepUk0ov5SaP+u7X5h4ZlKmNym+RyR/RUxk=; b=WVLJjWkkLhBUQCtM8iG2IYxZT2/zR3kp4tb7uUOK2Fig1jMb4NI59J5Etnru8gNmDS+jaYANDEeHlCJ6zexpnHIBRyk77UROxakuMVke/x5HOfDHFgF8DtqVcXoszcFWogKeVIgoEhq+TRcGagSkVpt2HFpGsipDdYPYwnNbGfBvs+xj30suj6KFkmeI05jbRyEoeMkMtB79PXLwi9TQSH00Lpo4UPiWZlVRCZCS2OQK/USIvtwm93QcZl4qn/In+LYtGbrTKqiSVwm4EIGu3BNWmHMqTZ046ceykTWuX0x6W/C2skheTVY0Fuh7NiuiNiBKA79eK2nu96k3M9FUxQ== Received: from PU1APC01FT020.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.252.58) by PU1APC01HT242.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com (10.152.252.238) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_CBC_SHA384_P384) id 15.20.302.6; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:34 +0000 Received: from PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM (10.152.252.53) by PU1APC01FT020.mail.protection.outlook.com (10.152.252.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.20.302.6 via Frontend Transport; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:34 +0000 Received: from PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.171.225.19]) by PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM ([10.171.225.19]) with mapi id 15.20.0323.018; Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:34 +0000 From: Damian Williamson To: Douglas Roark , Sjors Provoost , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Thread-Topic: [bitcoin-dev] A DNS-like decentralized mapping for wallet addresses? Thread-Index: AQHTai2ayrS+fw/dCUy1YLBY6lSGEqMtzvEAgBtCwICAAWe2mg== Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:34 +0000 Message-ID: References: , <1085B203-DB5E-42AB-A9F3-467D09246314@sprovoost.nl> In-Reply-To: <1085B203-DB5E-42AB-A9F3-467D09246314@sprovoost.nl> Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US Content-Language: en-AU X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-incomingtopheadermarker: OriginalChecksum:33CA89BC0AC357D105BC24E2F6CA5DBF51061DC29F05E18DACB30C3DBF48FC7C; UpperCasedChecksum:0A0B96DA1B27905DBCF33C3D51A086083BA5F68946BC2EDB910188F4B82F92D7; SizeAsReceived:7276; Count:46 x-ms-exchange-messagesentrepresentingtype: 1 x-tmn: [PNnwdPuwT/InXuOgUfagGenVIG86aN1Z] x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-microsoft-exchange-diagnostics: 1; PU1APC01HT242; 6:2BJpUMHrsNDsXKbdnk3GuSV+9e6OZokDPI0ebS5ATh7ErFCmtAa+J8y7cNNsZf1foB2BctsIYNKgEuqbZs1GeBqHxiTjatllOCANc8iSUuPFroL6fZxcokV2GorDQZYAp6lXjBjIWyxUJs0UAX7dpWJPq/r8OY/VmpL9lNQXquvxyihhVATDNiN9R0ywXYCHOeKyZBLrA4wZ2GtJY3VZDu9/DarfZApC1P+daBYCqZeZUhyr7ECtOr+ZciyPNbjfm4AxeDbAngOAtCHcBOmP298etoOhM61DyTOoTCKR//QQKO0FuuJ6c0knzLr6oR2r0uvvD6K7aiWI5LtBOMZW5ik5/Qu+dSyUPhzUZizSUro=; 5:Q84CndebGIhAyzmDSMlq0lp+dhIvOPrefsJq++Lf5A7T9szP0DyfepjK9+/NKzdnQ1hzejhGAswc7ahqJWy8Oe/hzRqCJrnshKMxQLoLxq81v9TqP/A8OoCzj+rfGPJGQWmoiabJjQf5Euy6DAgGvMpl7UFaSLEl+8NEfEQkfCw=; 24:L5RyWGn3FTGXMlIAO+SeK4xi+q4ndAcIheAts8kEp3VDQrEe90Eb998Tyr3qsi00bYtjI5YtpaH7PlLCiBBdeRVDwJw6ZFW876qT3jMxPJs=; 7:Mt41aXBqjJ0F3gwJoxORL3xVa/+xT83dkzszGqWBX48BBGqN88GqFlbEyr/RRgqkQ02SsuBPI+aGqPNNgEgT6evN+hmJod5Di9hCDL3lJpKKGFfVe9CU2F7ip0g6vKwq3oJqBf5eencqEUxkTL9/GICpeaRJrog0tW1rOsySJpsf8jISM4X7Fg/KtYS9RhnJ3ycuXu4RPPZ0mFSv2xD1S2+FbQKaGJSZbqdH0GqumRQ+8jrjRljdtcJn3vhuPxdy x-incomingheadercount: 46 x-eopattributedmessage: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: UriScan:; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(201702061074)(5061506573)(5061507331)(1603103135)(2017031320274)(2017031324274)(2017031323274)(2017031322404)(1601125374)(1603101448)(1701031045); SRVR:PU1APC01HT242; x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: PU1APC01HT242: x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 05f6d5db-aa63-4a93-e09a-08d546bfa9d6 x-exchange-antispam-report-cfa-test: BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(444000031); SRVR:PU1APC01HT242; BCL:0; PCL:0; RULEID:(100000803101)(100110400095); SRVR:PU1APC01HT242; x-forefront-prvs: 052670E5A4 x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(7070007)(98901004); DIR:OUT; SFP:1901; SCL:1; SRVR:PU1APC01HT242; H:PS2P216MB0179.KORP216.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM; FPR:; SPF:None; LANG:; spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99 spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_PS2P216MB01790A2EC251507D2739360E9D0F0PS2P216MB0179KORP_" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-OriginatorOrg: outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 05f6d5db-aa63-4a93-e09a-08d546bfa9d6 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 19 Dec 2017 09:05:34.2735 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Internet X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 84df9e7f-e9f6-40af-b435-aaaaaaaaaaaa X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: PU1APC01HT242 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 12:50:18 +0000 Subject: [bitcoin-dev] A DNS-like decentralized mapping for wallet addresses? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 09:05:40 -0000 --_000_PS2P216MB01790A2EC251507D2739360E9D0F0PS2P216MB0179KORP_ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There is no reason it should not be easily possible to develop a Bitcoin wa= llet that has an integrated name to address mapping feature. It might be a = good idea for a software product, it could even be based on Bitcoin Core. T= here is no specific reason that people wanting that sort of feature could n= ot use it. In fact, you could map names, strings, email addresses, it could= be very flexible. Relying on an additional service like DNS which is flexible enough to handl= e the job, does introduce an additional availability risk. There is no addi= tional privacy risk provided each mapped name or address is only used once = to send/receive one payment unless you directly use something personally id= entifiable like an email address which could be used to map bitcoin address= es to an individual. Personally, I am not concerned about privacy so much b= ut can understand that some highly value their privacy. If you get it right it will be a service better than namecoin transacting i= n Bitcoin. If you think that is valuable, go for it. Regards, Damian Williamson ________________________________ From: bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.org on behalf of Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev Sent: Monday, 18 December 2017 10:26 PM To: Douglas Roark; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A DNS-like decentralized mapping for wallet addr= esses? Have you thought about combining this with BIP-47? You could associate paym= ent codes with email via DNS. It would be nice if there was a way to get rid of the announcement transact= ion in BIP-47 and establish a shared secret out of bound. That would simpli= fy things, at the cost of an additional burden of storing more than an HD s= eed to recover a wallet that received funds this way. Perhaps the sender can email to the recipient the information they need to = retrieve the funds. The (first) transaction could have a time locked refund= in it, in case the payment code is stale. Sjors > Op 1 dec. 2017, om 04:08 heeft Douglas Roark via bitcoin-dev het volgende geschreven: > > On 2017/11/30 14:20, mandar mulherkar via bitcoin-dev wrote: >> I was wondering in terms of mass adoption, instead of long wallet >> addresses, maybe there should be a DNS-like decentralized mapping >> service to provide a user@crypto address? > > A few years ago, I was part of an effort with Armory and Verisign to > make something similar to what you're describing. > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wiley-paymentassoc-00 is where you can > find the one and only official draft. I worked on a follow-up with some > changes and some nice appendices, explaining some nice tricks one could > use to make payment management flexible. For various reasons, it never > got published. I think it's an interesting draft that could be turned > into something useful. Among other things, it was able to leverage BIP32 > and allow payment requests to be generated that automatically pointed > payees to the correct branch. DNSSEC may have some issues but, AFAIK, > it's as the easiest way to bootstrap identity to a common, reasonably > secure standard. > > -- > --- > Douglas Roark > Cryptocurrency, network security, travel, and art. > https://onename.com/droark > joroark@vt.edu > PGP key ID: 26623924 > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev --_000_PS2P216MB01790A2EC251507D2739360E9D0F0PS2P216MB0179KORP_ Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There is no reason it should not = be easily possible to develop a Bitcoin wallet that has an integrated name = to address mapping feature. It might be a good idea for a software product,= it could even be based on Bitcoin Core. There is no specific reason that people wanting that sort of feature= could not use it. In fact, you could map names, strings, email addresses, = it could be very flexible.


Relying on an additional service = like DNS which is flexible enough to handle the job, does introduce an addi= tional availability risk. There is no additional privacy risk provided each= mapped name or address is only used once to send/receive one payment unless you directly use something persona= lly identifiable like an email address which could be used to map bitcoin a= ddresses to an individual. Personally, I am not concerned about privacy so = much but can understand that some highly value their privacy.


If you get it right it will be a = service better than namecoin transacting in Bitcoin. If you think that is v= aluable, go for it.


Regards,

Damian Williamson



From: bitcoin-dev-bounces= @lists.linuxfoundation.org <bitcoin-dev-bounces@lists.linuxfoundation.or= g> on behalf of Sjors Provoost via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Sent: Monday, 18 December 2017 10:26 PM
To: Douglas Roark; Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A DNS-like decentralized mapping for wall= et addresses?
 
Have you thought about combining this with BIP-47?= You could associate payment codes with email via DNS.

It would be nice if there was a way to get rid of the announcement transact= ion in BIP-47 and establish a shared secret out of bound. That would simpli= fy things, at the cost of an additional burden of storing more than an HD s= eed to recover a wallet that received funds this way.

Perhaps the sender can email to the recipient the information they need to = retrieve the funds. The (first) transaction could have a time locked refund= in it, in case the payment code is stale.

Sjors

> Op 1 dec. 2017, om 04:08 heeft Douglas Roark via bitcoin-dev <bitco= in-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> het volgende geschreven:
>
> On 2017/11/30 14:20, mandar mulherkar via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>> I was wondering in terms of mass adoption, instead of long wallet<= br> >> addresses, maybe there should be a DNS-like decentralized mapping<= br> >> service to provide a user@crypto address?
>
> A few years ago, I was part of an effort with Armory and Verisign to > make something similar to what you're describing.
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wiley-paymentassoc-00 is where you ca= n
> find the one and only official draft. I worked on a follow-up with som= e
> changes and some nice appendices, explaining some nice tricks one coul= d
> use to make payment management flexible. For various reasons, it never=
> got published. I think it's an interesting draft that could be turned<= br> > into something useful. Among other things, it was able to leverage BIP= 32
> and allow payment requests to be generated that automatically pointed<= br> > payees to the correct branch. DNSSEC may have some issues but, AFAIK,<= br> > it's as the easiest way to bootstrap identity to a common, reasonably<= br> > secure standard.
>
> --
> ---
> Douglas Roark
> Cryptocurrency, network security, travel, and art.
> https://onename.com/droark
> joroark@vt.edu
> PGP key ID: 26623924
>
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

--_000_PS2P216MB01790A2EC251507D2739360E9D0F0PS2P216MB0179KORP_--