1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gmaxwell@gmail.com>) id 1WaXyo-0002xK-RK
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 16 Apr 2014 22:06:54 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.217.174 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.217.174; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
helo=mail-lb0-f174.google.com;
Received: from mail-lb0-f174.google.com ([209.85.217.174])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1WaXyo-000638-44
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 16 Apr 2014 22:06:54 +0000
Received: by mail-lb0-f174.google.com with SMTP id u14so8653750lbd.33
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:06:47 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.13.72 with SMTP id f8mr3153573lbc.40.1397686007503; Wed,
16 Apr 2014 15:06:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.89.68 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:06:47 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJDdENtqQt1f+L5htuuyPxUxsq0prLQFBLirTjJz0nG1gw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+s+GJDdENtqQt1f+L5htuuyPxUxsq0prLQFBLirTjJz0nG1gw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:06:47 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgRDmmv_EhUTRBfh8sBbCAoG_jcJeHE4fsKTHzOjoci4Gg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)
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
(gmaxwell[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-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
X-Headers-End: 1WaXyo-000638-44
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Warning message when running wallet in
Windows XP (or drop support?)
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: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 22:06:55 -0000
Bringing the thread back on-topic:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:14 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
> Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet
> banking with Windows XP.
> If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not
> secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as they
> have no keys to protect).
> Any opinions on what to do here?
I think eventually multi-wallet support will make it so that a wallet
won't be created by default. Instead users would create-wallet, which
would also give them options like using a HSM (e.g. trezor) or
multisig secured wallet. That would be a great point where, if they
elect to run and ordinary unsecured wallet, and the software detects
that the host is known-to-not-likely-be-secure it could whine at them
and direct them to a security best practices page.
Then you also avoid whining at people who never run a wallet or use a
hsm making the host security somewhat moot.
|
