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
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <chris.dcosta@meek.io>) id 1WUaM9-0004NS-Lm
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:26:21 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from slow1-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.86])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WUaM7-0005S4-S0 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:26:21 +0000
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (relay4-d.mail.gandi.net
[217.70.183.196])
by slow1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F094F47A026
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:15:20 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mfilter15-d.gandi.net (mfilter15-d.gandi.net [217.70.178.143])
by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313C7172098;
Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:15:14 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mfilter15-d.gandi.net
Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196])
by mfilter15-d.gandi.net (mfilter15-d.gandi.net [10.0.15.180])
(amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id 1laJjErrYzL3; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:15:12 +0200 (CEST)
X-Originating-IP: 178.50.82.118
Received: from [10.53.66.118] (ptra-178-50-82-118.mobistar.be [178.50.82.118])
(Authenticated sender: chris.dcosta@meek.io)
by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 898EC1720B2;
Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:15:07 +0200 (CEST)
References: <5339418F.1050800@riseup.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <5339418F.1050800@riseup.net>
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <51C10069-5C3B-462A-9184-669ABC6CD9D0@meek.io>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (11B651)
From: Chris D'Costa <chris.dcosta@meek.io>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:14:49 +0200
To: vv01f <vv01f@riseup.net>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [217.70.178.86 listed in list.dnswl.org]
X-Headers-End: 1WUaM7-0005S4-S0
Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] secure assigned bitcoin address directory
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: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:26:21 -0000
Security of transmission of person-to-person pay-to addresses is one of the u=
se cases that we are addressing on our hardware wallet.=20
I have yet to finish the paper but in a nutshell it uses a decentralised led=
ger of, what we refer to as, "device keys".=20
These keys are not related in any way to the Bitcoin keys, (which is why I'm=
hesitating about discussing it here) neither do they even attempt to identi=
fy the human owner if the device. But they do have a specific use case and t=
hat is to provide "advanced knowledge" of a publickey that can be used for e=
ncrypting a message to an intended recipient, without the requirement for a t=
hird-party CA, and more importantly without prior dialogue. We think it is t=
his that would allow you to communicate a pay-to address to someone without s=
eeing them in a secure way.
As I understand it the BlockChain uses "time" bought through proof of work t=
o establish a version of the truth, we are using time in the reverse sense :=
advanced knowledge of all pubkeys. Indeed all devices could easily check th=
eir own record to identify problems on the ledger.
There is of course more to this, but I like to refer to the "distributed led=
ger of device keys" as the "Web-of-trust re-imagined" although that isn't st=
rictly true.
Ok there you have it. The cat is out of the bag, feel free to give feedback,=
I have to finish the paper, apologies if it is not a topic for this list.
Regards
Chris D'Costa
> On 31 Mar 2014, at 12:21, vv01f <vv01f@riseup.net> wrote:
>=20
> Some users on bitcointalk[0] would like to have their vanity addresses
> available for others easily to find and verify the ownership over a kind
> of WoT. Right now they sign their own addresses and quote them in the
> forums.
> As I pointed out there already the centralized storage in the forums is
> not secury anyhow and signed messages could be swapped easily with the
> next hack of the forums.
>=20
> Is that use case taken care of in any plans already?
>=20
> I thought about abusing pgp keyservers but that would suit for single
> vanity addresses only.
> It seems webfinger could be part of a solution where servers of a
> business can tell and proof you if a specific address is owned by them.
>=20
> [0] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D502538
> [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D505095
>=20
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------=
----
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
|
