MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Nadav Ivgi <nadav@shesek.info>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2014 20:00:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGXD5f2_E82kEqsGGrhiywGogVCbR8vzs7q51=Luaq2ZEzGBtA@mail.gmail.com>
To: bitcoin-development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b676fd0e300ca04ef14b1d0
Subject: [Bitcoin-development] An idea for alternative payment scheme
Precedence: list

--047d7b676fd0e300ca04ef14b1d0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I had an idea for a payment scheme that uses key derivation, but instead of
the payee deriving the addresses, the payer would do it.

It would work like that:

   1. The payee publishes his master public key
   2. The payer generates a random "receipt number" (say, 25 random bytes)
   3. The payer derives an address from the master public key using the
   receipt number and pays to it
   4. The payer sends the receipt to the payee
   5. The payee derives a private key with that receipt and adds it to his
   wallet


Advantages:

   - It increases privacy by avoiding address reuse
   - The process is asynchronous. The payee is completely passive in the
   payment process and isn't required to provide new addresses before each
   payment (so no payment server required)
   - Its usable as a replacement for cases where re-used addresses are the
   most viable solution (like putting an address in a forum signature or as a
   development fund in a github readme)
   - The receipt also acts as a proof of payment that the payer can provide
   to the payee
   - Also, if the master is known to belong to someone, this also allows
   the payer prove to a third-party that the payment was made to that someone.
   If the output was spent, it also proves that he was aware of the payment
   and has the receipt.
   - Its a really thin abstraction layer that doesn't require much changes

Disadvantages:

   - Losing the receipt numbers means losing access to your funds, they are
   random and there's no way to restore them
   - It requires sending the receipt to the payee somehow. Email could work
   for that, but a better defined channel that also can talk to the Bitcoin
   client and add the receipt would be much better.

What do you think?

--047d7b676fd0e300ca04ef14b1d0
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div>I had an idea for a payment scheme that uses key deri=
vation, but instead of the payee deriving the addresses, the payer would do=
 it.</div><div><br></div><div>It would work like that:</div><div><ol><li>Th=
e payee publishes his master public key<br>

</li><li>The payer generates a random &quot;receipt number&quot; (say, 25 r=
andom bytes)<br></li><li>The payer derives an address from the master publi=
c key using the receipt number and pays to it<br></li><li>The payer sends t=
he receipt to the payee<br>

</li><li>The payee derives a private key with that receipt and adds it to h=
is wallet<br></li></ol></div><div><br></div><div>Advantages:</div><div><ul>=
<li>It increases privacy by avoiding address reuse<br></li><li>The process =
is asynchronous. The payee is completely passive in the payment process and=
 isn&#39;t required to provide new addresses before each payment (so no pay=
ment server required)<br>

</li><li>Its usable as a replacement for cases where re-used addresses are =
the most viable solution (like putting an address in a forum signature or a=
s a development fund in a github readme)<br></li><li>The receipt also acts =
as a proof of payment that the payer can provide to the payee<br>

</li><li>Also, if the master is known to belong to someone, this also allow=
s the payer prove to a third-party that the payment was made to that someon=
e. If the output was spent, it also proves that he was aware of the payment=
 and has the receipt.<br>

</li><li>Its a really thin abstraction layer that doesn&#39;t require much =
changes</li></ul></div><div>Disadvantages:</div><div><ul><li>Losing the rec=
eipt numbers means losing access to your funds, they are random and there&#=
39;s no way to restore them<br>

</li><li>It requires sending the receipt to the payee somehow. Email could =
work for that, but a better defined channel that also can talk to the Bitco=
in client and add the receipt would be much better.</li></ul></div><div>

What do you think?</div></div>

--047d7b676fd0e300ca04ef14b1d0--