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
|
Return-Path: <shiva@blockonomics.co>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A688C927
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:57:03 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from blockonomics.co (blockonomics.co [52.10.115.182])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 682FD14B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:57:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-ua0-f169.google.com (mail-ua0-f169.google.com
[209.85.217.169])
(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by blockonomics.co (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8B4D11E55B8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:57:02 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-ua0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 47so8934218uas.8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Mon, 30 Oct 2017 01:57:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaXcGPNouyvlee4e+Q0/qNBY8Y+mca9vl9+PPVXi/bO1DIgRpNsS
AjGbDWOkEi7b2zqq4cJX49Z0rQX/OO8MHNcwjg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+SFxqc+NiTy8d9lLWeavxFEq7ZVSXEpMyMJTtxenjqHyUVmw55uFdr7+EH15ETju+7ESUwMa84+0HwLuzGxgws=
X-Received: by 10.176.80.183 with SMTP id c52mr7352351uaa.162.1509353821293;
Mon, 30 Oct 2017 01:57:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.176.7.212 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 01:56:40 -0700 (PDT)
From: shiva sitamraju <shiva@blockonomics.co>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 14:26:40 +0530
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CABuOfujV1gAaSOKBB7S0_JKuwp+3iNhY5kN59F3LLndPENUA_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CABuOfujV1gAaSOKBB7S0_JKuwp+3iNhY5kN59F3LLndPENUA_Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="94eb2c18fd225bd301055cbfd28c"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.0 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 11:44:19 +0000
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Visually Differentiable - Bitcoin Addresses
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 08:57:03 -0000
--94eb2c18fd225bd301055cbfd28c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Hi,
When I copy and paste bitcoin address, I double check the first few bytes,
to make sure I copied the correct one. This is to make sure some rogue
software is not changing the address, or I incorrectly pasted the wrong
address.
With Bech32 address, its seems like in this department we are taking as
step in the backward direction. With the traditional address, I could
compare first few bytes like 1Ko or 1L3. With bech32, bc1. is all I can see
and compare which is likely to be same anyway. Note that most users will
only compare the first few bytes only (since addresses themselves are very
long and will overflow in a mobile text box).
Is there anyway to make the Bech32 addresses format more visually distinct
(atleast the first few bytes) ?
--94eb2c18fd225bd301055cbfd28c
Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div><div>Hi,<br><br></div>When I copy and paste bitc=
oin address, I double check the first few bytes, to make sure I copied the =
correct one. This is to make sure some rogue software is not changing the a=
ddress, or I incorrectly pasted the wrong address.<br><br><br></div>With Be=
ch32 address, its seems like in this department we are taking as step in th=
e backward direction. With the traditional address, I could compare first f=
ew bytes like 1Ko or 1L3. With bech32, bc1. is all I can see and compare wh=
ich is likely to be same anyway. Note that most users will only compare the=
first few bytes only (since addresses themselves are very long and will ov=
erflow in a mobile text box).<br><br></div>Is there anyway to make the Bech=
32 addresses format more visually distinct (atleast the first few bytes) ? =
<br></div>
--94eb2c18fd225bd301055cbfd28c--
|
