Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.214.180 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.214.180; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ob0-f180.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <8641358D-7484-42AF-9449-C226EF4FB6B4@grabhive.com>
References: <9179D240-EE7E-41A4-AA59-7C96246D8CFB@grabhive.com>
	<CANEZrP1k9xsOESVL6yD+MvaO53Z9Fj_MifnquKi+2fcfk0uP4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<8641358D-7484-42AF-9449-C226EF4FB6B4@grabhive.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Sep 2013 13:43:40 +0200
Message-ID: <CANEZrP1oJsxcg=N2M_a8VW69=was7VM8cFGVpKeWx0x-eqFuLw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Wendell <w@grabhive.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e0115e84a4b0a0404e5f1e651
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Simple contacts exchange (was: Social
 network integration (brainstorm))
Precedence: list

--089e0115e84a4b0a0404e5f1e651
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

The current version requires a signed cert yes. Whether that's difficult or
not depends on the policies of the cert authorities. Ultimately all they
have to do is verify an email address by sending it a clickable link, which
is why StartSSL do it for free. Probably they aren't optimised for
usability, but there's no technical reason why one couldn't be. It's a
competitive market, after all.

There's also the option of extending the payment protocol to support other
forms of PKI. But from a technical perspective the X.509 PKI is fine.
Someone can always set up their own CA for the Bitcoin community and
convince wallet developers to include their root cert, after all.


On Mon, Sep 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Wendell <w@grabhive.com> wrote:

> OK, I was under the impression that this was mostly developed for
> merchants. I've seen some discussion here that seemed to suggest it
> requiring some non-trivial (for an end user) steps like getting a CA-signed
> certificate.
>
> -wendell
>
> grabhive.com | twitter.com/grabhive | gpg: 6C0C9411
>
> On Sep 7, 2013, at 11:44 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>
> > This is the sort of thing the payment protocol is for. The recipient
> would vend a PaymentRequest containing identity details. The sender would
> submit a Payment containing his/hers. The wallet then understands what to
> do.
>
>

--089e0115e84a4b0a0404e5f1e651
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">The current version requires a signed cert yes. Whether th=
at&#39;s difficult or not depends on the policies of the cert authorities. =
Ultimately all they have to do is verify an email address by sending it a c=
lickable link, which is why StartSSL do it for free. Probably they aren&#39=
;t optimised for usability, but there&#39;s no technical reason why one cou=
ldn&#39;t be. It&#39;s a competitive market, after all.<div>
<br></div><div>There&#39;s also the option of extending the payment protoco=
l to support other forms of PKI. But from a technical perspective the X.509=
 PKI is fine. Someone can always set up their own CA for the Bitcoin commun=
ity and convince wallet developers to include their root cert, after all.</=
div>
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Mon,=
 Sep 9, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Wendell <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:w@=
grabhive.com" target=3D"_blank">w@grabhive.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><bl=
ockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #=
ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
OK, I was under the impression that this was mostly developed for merchants=
. I&#39;ve seen some discussion here that seemed to suggest it requiring so=
me non-trivial (for an end user) steps like getting a CA-signed certificate=
.<br>

<div class=3D"im HOEnZb"><br>
-wendell<br>
<br>
<a href=3D"http://grabhive.com" target=3D"_blank">grabhive.com</a> | <a hre=
f=3D"http://twitter.com/grabhive" target=3D"_blank">twitter.com/grabhive</a=
> | gpg: 6C0C9411<br>
<br>
</div><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">On Sep 7, 2013, at 11:44 PM, =
Mike Hearn wrote:<br>
<br>
&gt; This is the sort of thing the payment protocol is for. The recipient w=
ould vend a PaymentRequest containing identity details. The sender would su=
bmit a Payment containing his/hers. The wallet then understands what to do.=
<br>

<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>

--089e0115e84a4b0a0404e5f1e651--