Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WUagP-0004W6-DG for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:47:17 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.212.179 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.212.179; envelope-from=natanael.l@gmail.com; helo=mail-wi0-f179.google.com; Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com ([209.85.212.179]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WUagO-0003dv-2m for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:47:17 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f179.google.com with SMTP id z2so1370735wiv.0 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:47:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.194.205.35 with SMTP id ld3mr3064672wjc.82.1396266429875; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:47:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.54.34 with HTTP; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 04:46:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51C10069-5C3B-462A-9184-669ABC6CD9D0@meek.io> References: <5339418F.1050800@riseup.net> <51C10069-5C3B-462A-9184-669ABC6CD9D0@meek.io> From: Natanael Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:46:49 +0200 Message-ID: To: "Chris D'Costa" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 (natanael.l[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: 1WUagO-0003dv-2m Cc: "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: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 11:47:17 -0000 This sounds like Namecoin. You can already register profiles with it, including keypairs. onename.io is a web-based client you can use to register on the Namecoin blockchain. On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Chris D'Costa wrote= : > Security of transmission of person-to-person pay-to addresses is one of t= he use cases that we are addressing on our hardware wallet. > > I have yet to finish the paper but in a nutshell it uses a decentralised = ledger of, what we refer to as, "device keys". > > 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 id= entify the human owner if the device. But they do have a specific use case = and that is to provide "advanced knowledge" of a publickey that can be used= for encrypting a message to an intended recipient, without the requirement= for a third-party CA, and more importantly without prior dialogue. We thin= k it is this that would allow you to communicate a pay-to address to someon= e without seeing them in a secure way. > > As I understand it the BlockChain uses "time" bought through proof of wor= k to establish a version of the truth, we are using time in the reverse sen= se : advanced knowledge of all pubkeys. Indeed all devices could easily che= ck their own record to identify problems on the ledger. > > There is of course more to this, but I like to refer to the "distributed = ledger of device keys" as the "Web-of-trust re-imagined" although that isn'= t strictly true. > > Ok there you have it. The cat is out of the bag, feel free to give feedba= ck, I have to finish the paper, apologies if it is not a topic for this lis= t. > > Regards > > Chris D'Costa > > >> On 31 Mar 2014, at 12:21, vv01f wrote: >> >> 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. >> >> Is that use case taken care of in any plans already? >> >> 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. >> >> [0] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D502538 >> [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D505095 >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development