path: root/7b/f4046899fad2a44379f3c576aee6f5a347916b

Return-Path: <keatonatron@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D0BBBCB
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue,  8 Mar 2016 23:07:14 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-oi0-f51.google.com (mail-oi0-f51.google.com
	[209.85.218.51])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56F29106
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue,  8 Mar 2016 23:07:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oi0-f51.google.com with SMTP id c203so22578494oia.2
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:07:13 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; 
	bh=3sDMq/ag03KTzIHf6AIzRL1hNa5VZAzMDyZbfudJ6Kc=;
	b=nUNrEzZfBAGq8eV5tUGFd5NOmoVluCaJcufzXQ45KupOea7PIVkDks4RuD0z/wx+7H
	wKapO31xcwyicFCafMdnTbLrOT95F7rjvwnJOdSTkJiz5XaVhqRmgfHEPLfSOQXCHcOK
	JkmWG9eawAE9fMa/cgb5M8zPgfWsf+h6rCdKczXeXE2e2JDIbXs3UsNpqU1QEyYAqrDb
	AYZaCw0iPWv8Yfk9e1TiG5rcwyx1oiMe4ZVGGNlJW3QCVGyzwERqoGVyJsH9eecCndZa
	uzTHPbZrn4VBxf8IA7TSOptBlNSVQLhDeDYzxSLfrrBafiw/8UnmhOSzc5W/SO1wP0Lv
	QZ+A==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
	h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
	:message-id:subject:to;
	bh=3sDMq/ag03KTzIHf6AIzRL1hNa5VZAzMDyZbfudJ6Kc=;
	b=cRqDC7CYPweRn6LfoSEgOrtPn+h82aRPH6l5iSxkK4zQggXaxZl6od70sV02CQhVRh
	Q+s6Bu9+ejKn7Z3IEAbF3nMFQeiW8L7IiuEcrMtkmVgjnqpZrecqMy5+5Kl7OXBIkFLy
	KCDeHM1L+sn5Ws2eIJjWOSn/t6l1INpkeRBsDvW3dnx1PBZK/2Nm0BOEFcMSTP6ppayo
	eqePKbj7dwZMFRW7vk/b8QiDEn45QiL/J1O88vjmnx5galJqL9jmmCNvx1Nl+nmpC/Gq
	u9zqUYC+rz7pctltcr+MWhHZ+MKsNm8mb6s4SlOglukbO8sM4WDWY5W8apC50hNh6jq7
	6D0g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJJqBNeVbk1KflauvMFNuil4DPLF28/ZlKioVwHlk1u3u96OJ//AsGRh0eUbYnMbP6YRjbguVvy36GbUmg==
X-Received: by 10.202.193.10 with SMTP id r10mr19538801oif.126.1457478432705; 
	Tue, 08 Mar 2016 15:07:12 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABqynx+gGnJ2AVByr1eKueSaohHtJVFsAVKrfS94StW2NzLWjw@mail.gmail.com>
	<201603082234.14398.luke@dashjr.org>
In-Reply-To: <201603082234.14398.luke@dashjr.org>
From: James MacWhyte <macwhyte@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 23:07:03 +0000
Message-ID: <CAH+Axy77qm0Ls3vNFxhbqfaG=PvraX92RqFPKZs7je=qNuSA6Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a113dc36e3fd361052d91a4e1
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
	DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 00:00:23 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Proposed BIP extension to BIP 0070
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development 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, 08 Mar 2016 23:07:14 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2016 23:07:14 -0000

--001a113dc36e3fd361052d91a4e1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

Our BIP just defines protocol definitions, and doesn't really dictate how
people use them (we're coming up with a new title for the BIP, by the way,
to more accurately convey that). Using our definitions as building blocks,
someone could definitely accomplish what you described. For example, Joe
Mobile Wallet User's wallet could upload a slew of generic PaymentRequest
messages with signatures to prove his identity, and the server could then
create encryptedPaymentRequest messages using the server's key for
encryption and communication with the other party. In this case the server
would essentially be a proxy for the user without having actual access to
the user's private keys.

My personal goal with the protocol was to keep it extremely flexible so
developers could use it to build all different types of schemes while
keeping standard messages that could be forwarded between services if
needed. Does the above make sense?

James

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 2:55 PM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Is there a way for Joe Mobile Wallet User to upload a set of N
> PaymentRequests
> authenticated by his key to an untrusted server, which encrypts and passes
> them on in response to InvoiceRequests? Or does this necessarily require
> the
> recipient to be online?
>
> On Tuesday, March 01, 2016 6:58:16 PM Justin Newton via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > The following draft BIP proposes an update to the Payment Protocol.
> >
> > Motivation:
> >
> > The motivation for defining this extension to the BIP70 Payment Protocol
> is
> > to allow 2 parties to exchange payment information in a permissioned and
> > encrypted way such that wallet address communication can become a more
> > automated process. Additionally, this extension allows for the requestor
> of
> > a PaymentRequest to supply a certificate and signature in order to
> > facilitate identification for address release. This also allows
> > for automated creation of off blockchain transaction logs that are human
> > readable, containing who you transacted with, in addition to the
> > information that it contains today.
> >
> > The motivation for this extension to BIP70 is threefold:
> >
> > 1. Ensure that the payment details can only be seen by the participants
> in
> > the transaction, and not by any third party.
> > 2. Enhance the Payment Protocol to allow for store and forward servers in
> > order to allow, for example, mobile wallets to sign and serve
> > Payment Requests.
> > 3. Allow a sender of funds the option of sharing their identity with the
> > receiver. This information could then be used to:
> >
> >         * Make bitcoin logs more human readable
> >         * Give the user the ability to decide who to release payment
> > details to
> >         * Allow an entity such as a political campaign to ensure donors
> > match regulatory and legal requirements
> >         * Allow for an open standards based way for regulated financial
> > entities to meet regulatory requirements
> >         * Automate the active exchange of payment addresses, so static
> > addresses and BIP32 X-Pubs can be avoided to maintain privacy
> > and convenience
> >
> > In short we wanted to make bitcoin more human, while at the same time
> > improving transaction privacy.
> >
> > Full proposal here:
> >
> >
> https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-invoicerequest-extension
> > .mediawiki
> >
> > We look forward to your thoughts and feedback on this proposal!
> >
> > Justin
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>

--001a113dc36e3fd361052d91a4e1
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><span style=3D"font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px">Our BIP =
just defines protocol definitions, and doesn&#39;t really dictate how peopl=
e use them (we&#39;re coming up with a new title for the BIP, by the way, t=
o more accurately convey that). Using our definitions as building blocks, s=
omeone could definitely accomplish what you described. For example, Joe Mob=
ile Wallet User&#39;s wallet could upload a slew of generic PaymentRequest =
messages with signatures to prove his identity, and the server could then c=
reate encryptedPaymentRequest messages using the server&#39;s key for encry=
ption and communication with the other party. In this case the server would=
 essentially be a proxy for the user without having actual access to the us=
er&#39;s private keys.</span><br style=3D"font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px=
"><br style=3D"font-size:13px;line-height:19.5px"><span style=3D"font-size:=
13px;line-height:19.5px">My personal goal with the protocol was to keep it =
extremely flexible so developers could use it to build all different types =
of schemes while keeping standard messages that could be forwarded between =
services if needed. Does the above make sense?</span><div><span style=3D"li=
ne-height:19.5px"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"line-height:19.5px">=
James<br></span><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">On Tue, Mar=
 8, 2016 at 2:55 PM Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:bitco=
in-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org">bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a>=
&gt; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 =
0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Is there a way for Joe =
Mobile Wallet User to upload a set of N PaymentRequests<br>
authenticated by his key to an untrusted server, which encrypts and passes<=
br>
them on in response to InvoiceRequests? Or does this necessarily require th=
e<br>
recipient to be online?<br>
<br>
On Tuesday, March 01, 2016 6:58:16 PM Justin Newton via bitcoin-dev wrote:<=
br>
&gt; The following draft BIP proposes an update to the Payment Protocol.<br=
>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Motivation:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; The motivation for defining this extension to the BIP70 Payment Protoc=
ol is<br>
&gt; to allow 2 parties to exchange payment information in a permissioned a=
nd<br>
&gt; encrypted way such that wallet address communication can become a more=
<br>
&gt; automated process. Additionally, this extension allows for the request=
or of<br>
&gt; a PaymentRequest to supply a certificate and signature in order to<br>
&gt; facilitate identification for address release. This also allows<br>
&gt; for automated creation of off blockchain transaction logs that are hum=
an<br>
&gt; readable, containing who you transacted with, in addition to the<br>
&gt; information that it contains today.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; The motivation for this extension to BIP70 is threefold:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; 1. Ensure that the payment details can only be seen by the participant=
s in<br>
&gt; the transaction, and not by any third party.<br>
&gt; 2. Enhance the Payment Protocol to allow for store and forward servers=
 in<br>
&gt; order to allow, for example, mobile wallets to sign and serve<br>
&gt; Payment Requests.<br>
&gt; 3. Allow a sender of funds the option of sharing their identity with t=
he<br>
&gt; receiver. This information could then be used to:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Make bitcoin logs more human readab=
le<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Give the user the ability to decide=
 who to release payment<br>
&gt; details to<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Allow an entity such as a political=
 campaign to ensure donors<br>
&gt; match regulatory and legal requirements<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Allow for an open standards based w=
ay for regulated financial<br>
&gt; entities to meet regulatory requirements<br>
&gt;=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0* Automate the active exchange of pay=
ment addresses, so static<br>
&gt; addresses and BIP32 X-Pubs can be avoided to maintain privacy<br>
&gt; and convenience<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; In short we wanted to make bitcoin more human, while at the same time<=
br>
&gt; improving transaction privacy.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Full proposal here:<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; <a href=3D"https://github.com/techguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-invoicer=
equest-extension" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://github.com/t=
echguy613/bips/blob/master/bip-invoicerequest-extension</a><br>
&gt; .mediawiki<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; We look forward to your thoughts and feedback on this proposal!<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Justin<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
bitcoin-dev mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org" target=3D"_blank">=
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev" =
rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail=
man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div></div>

--001a113dc36e3fd361052d91a4e1--