Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YJXbC-0000Kd-Qk for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 06 Feb 2015 01:20:46 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of airbitz.co designates 209.85.220.42 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.220.42; envelope-from=paul@airbitz.co; helo=mail-pa0-f42.google.com; Received: from mail-pa0-f42.google.com ([209.85.220.42]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YJXb7-0004wg-IT for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 06 Feb 2015 01:20:46 +0000 Received: by mail-pa0-f42.google.com with SMTP id bj1so13724073pad.1 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 17:20:32 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:content-type:mime-version:subject:from :in-reply-to:date:cc:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references :to; bh=CaprB1rT/L592DqtUy/him+D9NgZn2Ej62VpgT2snJk=; b=BPjmLsKRpWI9+ZZ+93HmIipoJ961ZRarsmUUS+Jdbapp0DguXvADF3+OyRo2UB6xUK +lw9cQQHB0xuoPw5vyhjSoQAM5RPBLOcu/+HA55ytgaaVGxiuFzi+7zeGuJFWIqtIdze 7Cr3H0uJqmZYUIqm3Gma4RQB1ORmH/6LeYQkCzMQzH+izp35DvUnb5j84Kt2j8CPvK4H dvO/MU4VWgN8pGDAfZM2AAnE6O4c06C6uqaFYLERkUi34Jv+7GbVXquuSPigYEeK8t7d avsQDOZjwAzxYZqwleMYx3/FTDawCjqKpEz6ODCiBAxZKv64B4yJaUMb20l0McdxzQ3f E/mQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlkSzBdWdqs+/aVoOpIFpk86A8ISR0MTRWciJQSLqulzwEAI+uR7/sqNHaazxFcYvRhJiwN X-Received: by 10.70.48.33 with SMTP id i1mr1404136pdn.153.1423184322575; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 16:58:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.204.163.123] (mobile-166-171-251-007.mycingular.net. [166.171.251.7]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id bc1sm6267075pad.12.2015.02.05.16.58.40 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Feb 2015 16:58:41 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-32EFC4CE-12D4-4DF8-86EA-A859F42DA7F0 Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) From: Paul Puey X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12B411) In-Reply-To: <20150205233421.GP39876@giles.gnomon.org.uk> Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 16:58:39 -0800 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <5D9B0989-0AE1-40FB-8B73-69D352BDB29A@airbitz.co> References: <54D3D636.1030308@voskuil.org> <279489A5-1E46-48A2-8F58-1A25821D4D96@gmail.com> <6AEDF3C4-DEE0-4E31-83D0-4FD92B125452@voskuil.org> <20150205233421.GP39876@giles.gnomon.org.uk> To: Roy Badami X-Spam-Score: -0.3 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.3 HTML_FONT_FACE_BAD BODY: HTML font face is not a word 0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature 0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external image X-Headers-End: 1YJXb7-0004wg-IT Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for P2P Wireless (Bluetooth LE) transfer of Payment URI X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2015 01:20:46 -0000 --Apple-Mail-32EFC4CE-12D4-4DF8-86EA-A859F42DA7F0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Although consumer to merchant is a use case for BLE I would argue that NFC h= as a higher chance of providing a better user experience in most cases since= , at least on Android, a user can tap their phone without even having a wall= et running. The URI handler will launch the wallet for them. However a dedic= ated, user facing, screen can give certainty that the user is connecting to t= he correct recipient.=20 1. Because it can show an address prefix=20 2. It can display the users nickname/handle upon connecting which is only se= nt to the merchant upon a point to point connection. Not a broadcast.=20 The Airbitz wallet already does this on the recipient side. A popup shows th= e most recent person connecting to the recipient.=20 =20 Paul Puey CEO / Co-Founder, Airbitz Inc 619.850.8624 | http://airbitz.co | San Diego =20 On Feb 5, 2015, at 3:34 PM, Roy Badami wrote: For peer-to-peer payments, how common do we think that the payment is of an ad hoc nature rather than to a known contact? If I want to pay my friends/colleagues/etc over a restaurant table there's no reason why I couldn't already have their public keys in my contact list - then it would be pretty straightforward to have a watertight mechanism where I would know who I was paying. You could probably even relatively securely bootstrap a key exchange over SMS, relying only on the contacts already having each other in their phonebooks. As for comsumer-to-merchant transactions where the merchant is a bricks and mortar merchant, IMHO it absolutely has to be "pay that terminal over there". It's the trust model we all currently use - whether paying cash or card - and it's the only trust model that works IMHO (and customers and businesses alike are well aware of the risks of a fraudster standing behind the counter pretending to be an employee accepting payment - and by and large are pretty good at mitigating it). OTOH as we've discussed here before there are many use cases where the custoemr doesn't actually know or care about the name of the shop or bar they walked into but is pretty damn sure that they need to make payment to the person over there behind the counter. Granted, there are cases taht dont' fall into either of the above - but they're the cases that are (a) harder to figure out how to authenticate and consequently (b) the use cases that are going to be most subject to attempted fraud. roy > On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 03:02:56PM -0800, William Swanson wrote: >> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Eric Voskuil wrote: >> A MITM can receive the initial broadcast and then spoof it by jamming the= >> original. You then only see one. >=20 > You are right, of course. There is no way to make Bluetooth 100% > secure, since it is an over-the-air technology. You could try securing > it using a CA or other identity server, but now you've excluded ad-hoc > person-to-person payments. Plus, you need an active internet > connection to reach the CA. >=20 > You can try using proximity as a substitute for identity, like > requiring NFC to kick-start the connection, but at that point you > might as well use QR codes. >=20 > This BIP is not trying to provide absolute bullet-proof security, > since that's impossible given the physical limitations of the > Bluetooth technology. Instead, it's trying to provide the > best-possible security given those constraints. In exchange for this, > we get greatly enhanced usability in common scenarios. >=20 > There are plenty of usable, real-world technologies with big security > holes. Anybody with lock-picking experience will tell you this, but > nobody is welding their front door shut. The ability to go in and out > is worth the security risk. >=20 > Bluetooth payments add a whole new dimension to real-world Bitcoin > usability. Do we shut that down because it can't be made perfect, or > do we do the best we can and move forward? >=20 > -William >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---- > Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, > sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is yo= ur > hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought > leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a= > look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >=20 --Apple-Mail-32EFC4CE-12D4-4DF8-86EA-A859F42DA7F0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Although consumer to merchant is a use= case for BLE I would argue that NFC has a higher chance of providing a bett= er user experience in most cases since, at least on Android, a user can tap t= heir phone without even having a wallet running. The URI handler will launch= the wallet for them. However a dedicated, user facing, screen can give cert= ainty that the user is connecting to the correct recipient. 
=
1. Because it can show an address prefix 
2. I= t can display the users nickname/handle upon connecting which is only sent t= o the merchant upon a point to point connection. Not a broadcast. 

The Airbitz wallet already does this on the recipient s= ide. A popup shows the most recent person connecting to the recipient. =

3D=   
Paul Puey CEO / Co-= Founder, Airbitz Inc
619.850.8624 | http://airbitz.co |=  San Diego
 3D"" = ;  3D"" 3D""

On Feb 5, 2015, at 3:34 PM, Roy Badami <roy@gnomon.org.uk> wrote:

For peer-to-peer payments, how common do we think that the payment is
of an ad hoc nature rather than to a known contact?

If I want to pay my friends/colleagues/etc over a restau= rant table
there's no reason why I couldn't already have the= ir public keys in my
contact list - then it would be pretty s= traightforward to have a
watertight mechanism where I would k= now who I was paying.  You could
probably even relative= ly securely bootstrap a key exchange over SMS,
relying only o= n the contacts already having each other in their
phonebooks= .

As for comsumer-to-merchant transactions w= here the merchant is a
bricks and mortar merchant, IMHO it a= bsolutely has to be "pay that
terminal over there".  It= 's the trust model we all currently use -
whether paying cas= h or card - and it's the only trust model that works
IMHO (a= nd customers and businesses alike are well aware of the risks
of a fraudster standing behind the counter pretending to be an
<= span>employee accepting payment - and by and large are pretty good at=
mitigating it).  OTOH as we've discussed here before there ar= e many
use cases where the custoemr doesn't actually know or= care about the
name of the shop or bar they walked into but= is pretty damn sure that
they need to make payment to the p= erson over there behind the counter.

Grante= d, there are cases taht dont' fall into either of the above -
but they're the cases that are (a) harder to figure out how to
<= span>authenticate and consequently (b) the use cases that are going to be
most subject to attempted fraud.

roy

On Thu, Feb 05, 2015 at 03:02:56PM -= 0800, William Swanson wrote:
On Th= u, Feb 5, 2015 at 2:10 PM, Eric Voskuil <eric@voskuil.org> wrote:
A MITM can receive the initial broadc= ast and then spoof it by jamming the
original. You then on= ly see one.

You are right, o= f course. There is no way to make Bluetooth 100%
secure, since it is an over-the-air technology. Y= ou could try securing
it using a CA or other identity server, but now you've excluded ad-hoc
person-to-person payments= . Plus, you need an active internet
connection to reach the CA.

Y= ou can try using proximity as a substitute for identity, like
requiring NFC to kick-start the con= nection, but at that point you
might as well use QR codes.

Thi= s BIP is not trying to provide absolute bullet-proof security,
since that's impossible given the p= hysical limitations of the
= Bluetooth technology. Instead, it's trying to provide the
best-possible security given thos= e constraints. In exchange for this,
we get greatly enhanced usability in common scenarios.

There are plenty of usable, real-world technol= ogies with big security
holes. Anybody with lock-picking experience will tell you this, but
nobody is welding their fr= ont door shut. The ability to go in and out
is worth the security risk.

Bluetooth payments add a whole new dimension to real-world Bitcoin=
usability. Do we shu= t that down because it can't be made perfect, or
do we do the best we can and move forward?

-William

--= ----------------------------------------------------------------------------=
Dive into the World o= f Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership w= ith Slashdot Media, is your
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought=
leadership blogs to n= ews, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a
look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
__________________= _____________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
<= blockquote type=3D"cite">https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo= /bitcoin-development

= --Apple-Mail-32EFC4CE-12D4-4DF8-86EA-A859F42DA7F0--