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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1R3WFB-0000Io-GE
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:53:57 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1R3WFA-0000Vz-NC for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:53:57 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (fl-184-4-160-40.dhcp.embarqhsd.net
[184.4.160.40]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6F535204002;
Tue, 13 Sep 2011 16:53:51 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: Douglas Huff <dhuff@jrbobdobbs.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2011 12:53:40 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.39-gentoo; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CABsx9T1SeEFkZkTfB_3Cy=iSms_2burxAo4bRdO-YJwHY7B8Ow@mail.gmail.com>
<201109131240.26029.luke@dashjr.org>
<CAPiTikUNHwVGi2bc8HrPi42E=9MpA4QvJv5dDFJGKFrAJWwW=w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPiTikUNHwVGi2bc8HrPi42E=9MpA4QvJv5dDFJGKFrAJWwW=w@mail.gmail.com>
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: CE5A D56A 36CC 69FA E7D2 3558 665F C11D D53E 9583
X-PGP-Key-ID: 665FC11DD53E9583
X-PGP-Keyserver: x-hkp://subkeys.pgp.net
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201109131253.43617.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.5 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1R3WFA-0000Vz-NC
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Project status
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, 13 Sep 2011 16:53:57 -0000
On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 12:48:58 PM Douglas Huff wrote:
> On Sep 13, 2011 11:40 AM, "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
> > Once created, they must submit the
> > transaction to a staff member with the proper authority to bring it to
> > the offline transaction-signing wallet (on a USB key), where it is
> > signed, and returned to this third wallet.
>
> I agreed up to this point. Private keys should not be stored on nand.
> Please look in to the data recovery clusterfuck nand creates when
> concerning sensitive data.
I didn't recommend storing private keys on NAND. The USB stick would contain
only the transaction that it being approved, and the offline-signing-wallet
would sign it. The USB stick then contains only the signed transaction to be
returned to an online node. At no time does it contain keys.
|
