diff options
| author | Mike Caldwell <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com> | 2013-10-25 14:50:10 -0400 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2013-10-25 18:50:22 +0000 |
| commit | edfab71553699e168c67db2bedda4e95a94fee6b (patch) | |
| tree | 4cbc62774bc1abdc6fccd4d429c0119240e5a3c9 | |
| parent | 9292e580ae5620fa0d429e0d1465ae39851486fc (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-edfab71553699e168c67db2bedda4e95a94fee6b.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-edfab71553699e168c67db2bedda4e95a94fee6b.zip | |
[Bitcoin-development] BIP 38
| -rw-r--r-- | 04/f52caf3411d16382f63b9d2611aed8c00e2d81 | 194 |
1 files changed, 194 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/04/f52caf3411d16382f63b9d2611aed8c00e2d81 b/04/f52caf3411d16382f63b9d2611aed8c00e2d81 new file mode 100644 index 000000000..81771bbee --- /dev/null +++ b/04/f52caf3411d16382f63b9d2611aed8c00e2d81 @@ -0,0 +1,194 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com>) id 1VZmSk-0007Rn-H6 + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:50:22 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of swipeclock.com + designates 64.95.72.244 as permitted sender) + client-ip=64.95.72.244; envelope-from=mcaldwell@swipeclock.com; + helo=mxout.myoutlookonline.com; +Received: from mxout.myoutlookonline.com ([64.95.72.244]) + by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) + (Exim 4.76) id 1VZmSj-0000D3-37 + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 25 Oct 2013 18:50:22 +0000 +Received: from mxout.myoutlookonline.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) + by mxout.myoutlookonline.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCFD88BE735 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:50:15 -0400 (EDT) +X-Virus-Scanned: by SpamTitan at mail.lan +Received: from HUB023.mail.lan (unknown [10.110.2.1]) + (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) + (No client certificate requested) + by mxout.myoutlookonline.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 01F328BE653 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:50:15 -0400 (EDT) +Received: from MAILR023.mail.lan ([10.110.18.122]) by HUB023.mail.lan + ([10.110.17.23]) with mapi; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:50:14 -0400 +From: Mike Caldwell <mcaldwell@swipeclock.com> +To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" + <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:50:10 -0400 +Thread-Topic: BIP 38 +Thread-Index: Ac7Rsu9HbXD/AZodT+GOXEAigqKqVg== +Message-ID: <B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5D998989775B@MAILR023.mail.lan> +Accept-Language: en-US +Content-Language: en-US +X-MS-Has-Attach: +X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: +acceptlanguage: en-US +Content-Type: multipart/alternative; + boundary="_000_B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5D998989775BMAILR023maill_" +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) +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 [64.95.72.244 listed in list.dnswl.org] + -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for + sender-domain + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message +X-Headers-End: 1VZmSj-0000D3-37 +Subject: [Bitcoin-development] BIP 38 +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, 25 Oct 2013 18:50:22 -0000 + +--_000_B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5D998989775BMAILR023maill_ +Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +Hey everyone, + +I have noticed that there was a recent change to BIP 0038 (Password-Protect= +ed Private Key) on the Wiki, which is a proposal I wrote in late 2012. Gre= +gory, it looks to me as though you have made this change, and I'm hoping fo= +r your help here. The change suggests that the number was never assigned, = +and that there has been no discussion regarding the proposal on this list. + +I had this number assigned by Amir Taaki in November of 2012, consistent wi= +th what I understood the procedure to be at the time by reading BIP 0001 on= + the Wiki. + +First off, I want to confirm that when I send to the list, that there isn't= + a technical reason it's not getting to everybody. I believe I most recent= +ly mentioned BIP 38 to this list on August 17, 2013. (EDIT: seems my prior = +messages, including an earlier revision of this message, have not made it t= +o the list) + +Secondly, in the case that it is deemed that this has never been properly s= +ubmitted, discussed, or pushed forward, I'd like to propose that this happe= +n, and request help with the formalities where I'm lacking. + +I believe BIP 38 is a valuable proposal that is seeing real-world use. BIP= + 38 allows people to create private keys (including paper wallets) protecte= +d by a password, and also allows one party to select the password for paper= + wallets to be created by another party. + +Real-world use includes a working implementation at BitAddress.org, one at = +Bit2Factor.org, implementation by Mycelium, and others. Also, others are i= +nformally using it as a sort of abbreviated escrow scheme where a buyer and= + seller agree on the buyer maintaining control over the release of funds. = +In short, it would be terribly confusing to reassign the number BIP 38 afte= +r already having had an established meaning for the better part of the year= +, particularly on what appears to be procedural grounds. + +Mike + + +--_000_B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5D998989775BMAILR023maill_ +Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable + +<html xmlns:v=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-micr= +osoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" = +xmlns:m=3D"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns=3D"http:= +//www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT= +=3D"text/html; charset=3Dus-ascii"><meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Micros= +oft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!-- +/* Font Definitions */ +@font-face + {font-family:Calibri; + panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;} +/* Style Definitions */ +p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal + {margin:0in; + margin-bottom:.0001pt; + font-size:11.0pt; + font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} +a:link, span.MsoHyperlink + {mso-style-priority:99; + color:blue; + text-decoration:underline;} +a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed + {mso-style-priority:99; + color:purple; + text-decoration:underline;} +span.EmailStyle17 + {mso-style-type:personal-compose; + font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; + color:windowtext;} +.MsoChpDefault + {mso-style-type:export-only; + font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";} +@page WordSection1 + {size:8.5in 11.0in; + margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;} +div.WordSection1 + {page:WordSection1;} +--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> +<o:shapedefaults v:ext=3D"edit" spidmax=3D"1026" /> +</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> +<o:shapelayout v:ext=3D"edit"> +<o:idmap v:ext=3D"edit" data=3D"1" /> +</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vli= +nk=3Dpurple><div class=3DWordSection1><p class=3DMsoNormal>Hey everyone,<o:= +p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>= +I have noticed that there was a recent change to BIP 0038 (Password-Protect= +ed Private Key) on the Wiki, which is a proposal I wrote in late 2012. = +; Gregory, it looks to me as though you have made this change, and I’= +m hoping for your help here. The change suggests that the number was = +never assigned, and that there has been no discussion regarding the proposa= +l on this list.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p = +class=3DMsoNormal>I had this number assigned by Amir Taaki in November of 2= +012, consistent with what I understood the procedure to be at the time by r= +eading BIP 0001 on the Wiki.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> = +</o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>First off, I want to confirm that when I sen= +d to the list, that there isn’t a technical reason it’s not get= +ting to everybody. I believe I most recently mentioned BIP 38 to this= + list on August 17, 2013. (EDIT: seems my prior messages, including an earl= +ier revision of this message, have not made it to the list)<o:p></o:p></p><= +p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>Secondly, in = +the case that it is deemed that this has never been properly submitted, dis= +cussed, or pushed forward, I’d like to propose that this happen, and = +request help with the formalities where I’m lacking.<o:p></o:p></p><p= + class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>I believe BIP = +38 is a valuable proposal that is seeing real-world use. BIP 38 allow= +s people to create private keys (including paper wallets) protected by a pa= +ssword, and also allows one party to select the password for paper wallets = +to be created by another party.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p>&nb= +sp;</o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>Real-world use includes a working impleme= +ntation at BitAddress.org, one at Bit2Factor.org, implementation by Myceliu= +m, and others. Also, others are informally using it as a sort of abbr= +eviated escrow scheme where a buyer and seller agree on the buyer maintaini= +ng control over the release of funds. In short, it would be terribly = +confusing to reassign the number BIP 38 after already having had an establi= +shed meaning for the better part of the year, particularly on what appears = +to be procedural grounds.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p> </o= +:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal>Mike<o:p></o:p></p><p class=3DMsoNormal><o:p>&n= +bsp;</o:p></p></div></body></html>= + +--_000_B09A5DE3EF411243BB3328232CD25A5D998989775BMAILR023maill_-- + + |