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
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
|
Return-Path: <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86ECDC002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 19:03:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6791540337
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 19:03:30 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: smtp4.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id cd7ctWOm5n1D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 19:03:29 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
Received: from mail-40133.protonmail.ch (mail-40133.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.133])
by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 02E8E402DC
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Tue, 10 May 2022 19:03:28 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 19:03:16 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail2; t=1652209406;
bh=3u1B2sayeeMIJ+mAU8jFWbI+HboEU4a3yYi92Lch/Sc=;
h=Date:To:From:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:
Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:
Message-ID;
b=Teox/lDu+ck11u433NxMgIeg59sliNFnsxVhcfvDiPYMK/G8iLfS4wHyf3ZBIAhGf
lWk0EWmhLtlXRwRbqhhIKBUcM1a2KZna0vGj8KZeK5ryeI8LxW2L1P9kJBAi+yYIzy
B8lEomYQK3MFcWiovRcgxbXWPWPcEVONZVpXBKqZ99ToccR8uEocokbP9a2rBtRRNQ
5r7oVyCfJcD2q4/cJt13vkFEmBGmINc3Fge3sRFrSJmREdl+Hgbq2XJ8kvNoDh2xYN
ScA2yrQWSqUIy9ENjkPOC8Ky3bUmApZTCYi1BQwcTMIdyBgntgYJ/fZeVpOs6M/PrC
k9iJ4ZOu7IRAQ==
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: AdamISZ <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: AdamISZ <AdamISZ@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <6IPqvNW2vQcHQLhUgSmQQLqtnV0RGrsUfnoUMKgv0SDQpVvKh7PIqJOKNazzgEzGE2W5OHHrlEtmg9lapjbiSjTpUuxqPmsiFua2P_ZN_FY=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <Xjq4gzy3me86tG6sYumDq16JE8EpRSnC90Ao-02Fyz3i55vRlLY7QKbW9TdaSJg8hiclxpBqhW93CtNgeCzVmbN3CDaW35P3BZwYp1o54H0=@protonmail.com>
References: <22c80504-e648-e021-866e-ca5a5db3b247@riseup.net>
<bsOJ-OnnA4FutVmPqtg1xY-k0notwX4OqqIpdMsymXR9-KnS2iXGUE8o7kDVeYBMCqAX0v3oEAmiVMhUIB25gupx6l_bLff2_CNsLK_sk-U=@protonmail.com>
<82948428-29a3-e50a-a54a-520a83f39bba@riseup.net>
<dI-CkifjUyQssT-JzKmv09W6NggL89orF78qz1AOFlBL7Kmxo6z5BVBEr6aZha_nbnBQHFcN1hqC5EZM7lB0U0jiBtE3ZWCiIR_dGBJMsDA=@protonmail.com>
<Xjq4gzy3me86tG6sYumDq16JE8EpRSnC90Ao-02Fyz3i55vRlLY7QKbW9TdaSJg8hiclxpBqhW93CtNgeCzVmbN3CDaW35P3BZwYp1o54H0=@protonmail.com>
Feedback-ID: 11565511:user:proton
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 10 May 2022 19:20:38 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Timelocked address fidelity bond
for BIP39 seeds
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2022 19:03:30 -0000
------- Original Message -------
On Tuesday, May 10th, 2022 at 17:54, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@=
lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Good morning waxwing,
<snip>
>
> Ah, yes, now I remember.
> I discussed this with Tamas as well in the past and that is why we conclu=
ded that in defiads, each UTXO can host at most one advertisement at any on=
e time.
> In the case of defiads there would be a sequence counter where a higher-s=
equenced advertisement would replace lower-sequenced advertisement, so you =
could update, but at any one time, for a defiads node, only one advertiseme=
nt per UTXO could be used.
> This assumed that there would be a defiads network with good gossip propa=
gation so our thinking at the time was that a higher-sequenced advertisemen=
t would quickly replace lower-sequenced ones on the network.
> But it is simpler if such replacement would not be needed, and you could =
then commit to the advertisement directly on the UTXO via a tweak.
>
> Each advertisement would also have a specific application ID that it appl=
ied to, and applications on top of defiads would ask the local defiads node=
to give it the ads that match a specific application ID, so a UTXO could o=
nly be used for one application at a time.
> This would be equivalent to domain separation tags that waxwing mentions.
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
>
I suppose ultimately this brings up the question of the scope of this BIP. =
The abstract points out that the BIP contains both a definition of address =
derivation, but also how to sign fidelity bond certificates.
My feeling is that the latter might be better not included? I note that the=
'Motivation' section gives motivation for standardisation of derivation (t=
his includes things like time schedule), but not the second area - certific=
ate signing. I think the second area is much more tricky, but much more to =
the point is, isn't it the case that that second area, can be interpreted w=
ithout consensus between wallet developers? So say you were a hardware wall=
et provider, or a "node in a box" provider - your customers want you to pro=
vide the ability move funds around, including e.g. moving funds out of an o=
ld Joinmarket wallet (in which say there is a now expired timelock address =
utxo) by just entering its BIP39 seed. If this BIP addresses that, it shoul=
d be enough.
I don't doubt that there's gains to be had from a broader community discuss=
ing and agreeing the details of how to create a fidelity bond certificate, =
but it's a separate, and more difficult, task.
Cheers,
waxwing/AdamISZ
|
