Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 15:54:04 +0200
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20130619135403.GA1783@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
References: <51BFD886.8000701@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <51BFD886.8000701@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Optional "wallet-linkable" address format
 - Payment Protocol
Precedence: list

On Mon, Jun 17, 2013 at 11:48:22PM -0400, Alan Reiner wrote:
> _*Goal*_:  An alternative address format made possible by BIP 32, which
> allows one to specify a "Wallet ID" and "One-time payment" code, instead
> of the standard one-use Base58-Hash160 addresses.   This allows parties
> with a persistent relationship to be able to prove that payment
> addresses they provide each other are linked to a particular wallet,
> reducing exposure to MitM attacks without the need for SSL or a web of
> trust, and without compromising the privacy of either party.    For
> instance, this could be used between businesses that frequently do
> business, by exchanging and verifying public keys beforehand, or could
> be used by an exchange to identify if a customer withdrawal address is
> related to their last deposit address, and if not enforce extra
> authentication measures.

Have you seen Timo Hanke's pay-to-contract presentation at the San Jose
conference? It seems very related:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qwyALGlG33Q

-- 
Pieter