Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.223.176 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.223.176; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-ie0-f176.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAKzHBKndU4nHHK=h4=G+hG_t_c77h0DHpeEUK+Kk9q2CsRHEcQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKzHBKndU4nHHK=h4=G+hG_t_c77h0DHpeEUK+Kk9q2CsRHEcQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 18:08:02 -0700
Message-ID: <CAAS2fgTV9hj1otAQZpF3tE+goNu591gj_mcoHrNCPBbVHuuz6Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
To: Mem Wallet <memwallet.info@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Cc: Bitcoin Development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] standardize on bitcoin signed ecies ?
Precedence: list

On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 5:57 PM, Mem Wallet <memwallet.info@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Does anyone see a value in a standardized PGP-style message,
> which would allow someone performing a bitcoin transaction to
> send signed encrypted messages using only public and private
> bitcoin keys ?
>
> I'd like to propose a signed encrypted message protocol, in case
> someone see's value in encoding such a thing into a BIP.

Using the same keys for signing and encryption is generally considered
a bad practice, for a number of reasons.

If the keys aren't the same, there is much less reason to use
something specific to Bitcoin.

Getting all the details right in an encryption implementation is very
difficulty, previously published efforts in Bitcoin software have been
_severely_ flawed and insecure. I am not confident that an effort
right now would receive adequate review.