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
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jgarzik@bitpay.com>) id 1X74OX-0007DN-CX
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:11:53 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com
designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.173; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com;
helo=mail-we0-f173.google.com;
Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1X74OW-0002UG-7i
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:11:53 +0000
Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id q58so804884wes.4
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:11:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date
:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
bh=2WJFNyLBO445gg88Va6zMbR8U/6ZlqXi4VA9s/x2YwM=;
b=Dszeq6iiBFwVh16T+TSM6cmQEaMLsMjdwsHJlP84bicVdbCEWjFp42boNGHEtTL3/N
39TBHdcjB6nM3ex4tpBDZS9LgDixd0ZRQp/LBRTCGoJxER5aPU6KUUR4hKI7bvoP7aDO
OxgWOHtEqzdqDyOePEiK8mdNFoBZj8QsiaqGErtNw/OW4OTWyc4qo0ZlUqxXvLE9YPiO
pxv4HjHJXDPLK1BNzjJjrUrg2wmeQoeOpHi7a7wpymHmMDQa6WQ2trH51LLEITQpELLl
j4g4KAl73zhzH03UYwVwPAOWS1cGwmumHc69Zjhw1mHdxETFGIdVY2qurSrSz5WnW6kl
B4/g==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlw91poTKO1S3AwJ4Qt4lZRuf/hWPTYizjjfL6xUkAKnEzwxZ1EDeaKjib/bNez8I6HW5Si
X-Received: by 10.181.13.44 with SMTP id ev12mr6378583wid.57.1405437105922;
Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:11:45 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.194.5.67 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:11:25 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201407151448.57223.luke@dashjr.org>
References: <CAJHLa0M7iEUQnJ9M4A3ev3EQqxUVQG85qucRamvMb0n-CztOFA@mail.gmail.com>
<201407151448.57223.luke@dashjr.org>
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@bitpay.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:11:25 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJHLa0Nj2f4mSKNggGH4sXZTLYNwdVGO7uMSzN7V_vVKU-6w9Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
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 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: 1X74OW-0002UG-7i
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin address TTL & key expiration?
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: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:11:53 -0000
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> They can already do this. It's perfectly valid for wallets/services to ignore
> (and not consider as payment) transactions using an address more than once.
> There might be race attacks if this is implemented in an immediate fashon
> (attacker transaction gets mined first to kill a payment), but should be
> pretty safe after a few blocks.
Sure it's valid. However, few users will appreciate "you ignored my
deposit" as a feature.
Payment protocol just doesn't well the use cases of,
* an on-going payment stream from, e.g. Eligius to coinbase
* deposit addresses and deposit situations
--
Jeff Garzik
Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist
BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/
|
