From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 03:41:40 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.10.15-gentoo; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAAS2fgRRobkE2GdYomtJof7HCH-9ZczE9EBj7DBS-pCGscUSNQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRRobkE2GdYomtJof7HCH-9ZczE9EBj7DBS-pCGscUSNQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201310260341.41613.luke@dashjr.org>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Payment protocol for onion URLs.
Precedence: list

On Saturday, October 26, 2013 3:31:05 AM Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> One limitation of the payment protocol as speced is that there is no
> way for a hidden service site to make use of its full authentication
> capability because they are unable to get SSL certificates issued to
> them.
> 
> A tor hidden service (onion site) is controlled by an RSA key.
> 
> It would be trivial to pack a tor HS pubkey into a self-signed x509
> certificate with the cn set to foooo.onion.
> ...
> Thoughts?

Is there any point to additional encryption over tor (which afaik is already 
encrypted end-to-end)? Is there a safe way to make this work through tor entry 
nodes/gateways?

It'd be nice to have a way to support namecoin-provided keys too...

Luke