Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
	helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
	by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
	(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1YWSdg-0001bI-37
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 13 Mar 2015 16:40:44 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.172 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.172; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f172.google.com; 
Received: from mail-ie0-f172.google.com ([209.85.223.172])
	by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
	(Exim 4.76) id 1YWSde-0004q7-Ur
	for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
	Fri, 13 Mar 2015 16:40:44 +0000
Received: by iecvj10 with SMTP id vj10so110691929iec.0
	for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
	Fri, 13 Mar 2015 09:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.50.79.230 with SMTP id m6mr84706308igx.33.1426264827618;
	Fri, 13 Mar 2015 09:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.36.54.147 with HTTP; Fri, 13 Mar 2015 09:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+vKqYfG=SoNAgTeD0C_Q7F2p6MWdWE90u7728g9s3=nkmNi4w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+vKqYfG=SoNAgTeD0C_Q7F2p6MWdWE90u7728g9s3=nkmNi4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 09:40:27 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0Zk6AYYY0st7JZbgSA_-TaM025Y
Message-ID: <CANEZrP0t0oXGz6uXaLrGHFKUeRNFBC_MKr7x3uTH3WPkTbe5tQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Matias Alejo Garcia <matias@bitpay.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01229aaa67ebab05112e28dd
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
	(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
	-0.0 SPF_PASS               SPF: sender matches SPF record
	1.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	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
X-Headers-End: 1YWSde-0004q7-Ur
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP32 Index Randomisation
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 16:40:44 -0000

--089e01229aaa67ebab05112e28dd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Hey Matias,

We are working on bitcore-wallet-server (BWS), a HD multisig wallet
> 'facilitator'.
> Currently the BWS instances hold the set of extended public keys of the
> wallet's peers to be able to derive  addresses.
>

Could you describe what exactly BWS does? It sounds like the server doesn't
have to actually derive the keys itself for any particular purpose beyond
knowing the addresses are a part of the wallet. Could the server work if it
didn't even know that, and was just a bucket of arbitrary addresses with
the clients themselves deriving the addresses?

--089e01229aaa67ebab05112e28dd
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Hey Matias,<div><br><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=
=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8=
ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>We ar=
e working on bitcore-wallet-server (BWS), a HD multisig wallet &#39;facilit=
ator&#39;.=C2=A0</div><div>Currently the BWS instances hold the set of exte=
nded public keys of the wallet&#39;s peers to be able to derive =C2=A0addre=
sses.</div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Could you describe what e=
xactly BWS does? It sounds like the server doesn&#39;t have to actually der=
ive the keys itself for any particular purpose beyond knowing the addresses=
 are a part of the wallet. Could the server work if it didn&#39;t even know=
 that, and was just a bucket of arbitrary addresses with the clients themse=
lves deriving the addresses?</div></div></div></div></div>

--089e01229aaa67ebab05112e28dd--