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
|
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 <brian.erdelyi@gmail.com>) id 1YHuyf-0003lU-00
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 01 Feb 2015 13:54:17 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.216.174 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.216.174; envelope-from=brian.erdelyi@gmail.com;
helo=mail-qc0-f174.google.com;
Received: from mail-qc0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YHuye-0002xo-6r
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sun, 01 Feb 2015 13:54:16 +0000
Received: by mail-qc0-f174.google.com with SMTP id s11so26880015qcv.5
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Sun, 01 Feb 2015 05:54:10 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.224.53.130 with SMTP id m2mr32046969qag.13.1422798850792;
Sun, 01 Feb 2015 05:54:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.58] ([64.147.83.112])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id
k10sm15544209qas.29.2015.02.01.05.54.09
(version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sun, 01 Feb 2015 05:54:09 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Brian Erdelyi <brian.erdelyi@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALkkCJbiv3o-oGoKY6sQkiLSeaCUfKVKHj1wqZUjfprmf9M5BA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2015 09:54:08 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <45C925F1-8872-4441-AEC8-B8AFAAE93D24@gmail.com>
References: <27395C55-CF59-4E65-83CA-73F903272C5F@gmail.com>
<CAAt2M18kRgJeNGu9GeKabRpTKPX9rVeoYiKoanz99bmV2jaf4w@mail.gmail.com>
<1348028F-26F8-42CB-9859-C9CB751BF0C9@gmail.com>
<CAAt2M1_3BdKQTVxsN7Hc-W=q0_NWyhBg1UAuSwxRQ8BePDa-8g@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAt2M1-b7ByF0yVSmwD_nj3uUSo5GFOmH860n1k6oKX_sqvEkw@mail.gmail.com>
<88211D58-DE9D-4B4A-B3A5-2EEFDFC5E02B@gmail.com>
<CALkkCJbiv3o-oGoKY6sQkiLSeaCUfKVKHj1wqZUjfprmf9M5BA@mail.gmail.com>
To: =?utf-8?Q?Martin_Habov=C5=A1tiak?= <martin.habovstiak@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-)
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
(brian.erdelyi[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
0.5 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1YHuye-0002xo-6r
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal to address Bitcoin malware
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: Sun, 01 Feb 2015 13:54:17 -0000
> BIP70 is quite safe agains MitB. If user copies URL belonging to other
> merchant, he would see the fact after entering it into his wallet
> application. The only problem is, attacker can buy from the same
> merchant with user's money. (sending him different URL) This can be
> mitigated by merchant setting "memo" to the description of the basket
> and some user info (e.g. address to which goods are sent).
I think BIP 70 does a good job at verifying where the payment request =
came from. I=E2=80=99m not convinced this is the same as verifying the =
transaction (ideally OOB).
> But if whole computer is compromised, you're already screwed. Trezor
> should help, but I'm not sure if it supports BIP70.
The reason for OOB verification is if the entire computer is =
compromised. Again, this may only be possible with a trusted =
intermediary or a web wallet.
Brian Erdelyi=
|
