Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WUwwH-0002RK-Qp for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:33:09 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 209.85.213.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.43; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-yh0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-yh0-f43.google.com ([209.85.213.43]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1WUwwG-0000Y6-1t for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:33:09 +0000 Received: by mail-yh0-f43.google.com with SMTP id b6so8814222yha.16 for ; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 04:33:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=/3Mn+BGrnQobHyzzIKeasL5CZxBapVm/fbB+OW4/OK8=; b=OG0b4cfvGB55V5YW4a7fqn+NrMeU5jZZHzNejfsQJxJGusrMIU3gkRA3Zyhn4doHAl ++36NDGI5wW0MUogAfFWrVZVq1WCZy6GTI++E6JEnl3ez/ASSz2OXXHub6zOtbXkQqdg 7c1q2JFeXYVo+tQdC5uaihpf2fxp1ZKn9ZtXXH5gHPvmACTmvX16lpiZ7y8+ITB+qfN+ OMTm668Lwa1SzLo2krV2U2pGxtmTsmLw44fPLhHgUWxDDL1mEXaB9tuQQjr3PmsqFgic fovNHIO9Le95aOCssD3YvsDqEDp4d0eNdkfkCCyme3iofpWvTMv2Da/xPLkhf5AzkSyC OeGw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnh/uRyI4A7GOdzFr5AW94+8AdP7q9FshHyg4uvT4HKHYpFU5GyC/ncWYKyuWTKTVsekRDp X-Received: by 10.236.156.65 with SMTP id l41mr12609998yhk.9.1396351981948; Tue, 01 Apr 2014 04:33:01 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.170.162.214 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Apr 2014 04:32:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51C10069-5C3B-462A-9184-669ABC6CD9D0@meek.io> References: <5339418F.1050800@riseup.net> <51C10069-5C3B-462A-9184-669ABC6CD9D0@meek.io> From: Jeff Garzik Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2014 07:32:41 -0400 Message-ID: To: "Chris D'Costa" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1WUwwG-0000Y6-1t Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] secure assigned bitcoin address directory X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2014 11:33:10 -0000 Re-reading this, even with the most recent message, is still isn't clear _precisely_ how your technology works, or why it is better than namecoin. User profiles (and distributed ledgers) need to reflect the latest updates, and a stream of updates of over time is precisely what bitcoin technology secures. Keys expire or are compromised, and the public ledger needs to reflect that. There is a lot of computer science involved in making sure the public ledger you see is not an outdated view. A log-like stream of changes is not the only way to do things, but other methods need less hand-wavy details (show the code) before they are well recognized as useful. On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Chris D'Costa wrote= : > Security of transmission of person-to-person pay-to addresses is one of t= he use cases that we are addressing on our hardware wallet. > > I have yet to finish the paper but in a nutshell it uses a decentralised = ledger of, what we refer to as, "device keys". > > These keys are not related in any way to the Bitcoin keys, (which is why = I'm hesitating about discussing it here) neither do they even attempt to id= entify the human owner if the device. But they do have a specific use case = and that is to provide "advanced knowledge" of a publickey that can be used= for encrypting a message to an intended recipient, without the requirement= for a third-party CA, and more importantly without prior dialogue. We thin= k it is this that would allow you to communicate a pay-to address to someon= e without seeing them in a secure way. > > As I understand it the BlockChain uses "time" bought through proof of wor= k to establish a version of the truth, we are using time in the reverse sen= se : advanced knowledge of all pubkeys. Indeed all devices could easily che= ck their own record to identify problems on the ledger. > > There is of course more to this, but I like to refer to the "distributed = ledger of device keys" as the "Web-of-trust re-imagined" although that isn'= t strictly true. > > Ok there you have it. The cat is out of the bag, feel free to give feedba= ck, I have to finish the paper, apologies if it is not a topic for this lis= t. > > Regards > > Chris D'Costa > > >> On 31 Mar 2014, at 12:21, vv01f wrote: >> >> Some users on bitcointalk[0] would like to have their vanity addresses >> available for others easily to find and verify the ownership over a kind >> of WoT. Right now they sign their own addresses and quote them in the >> forums. >> As I pointed out there already the centralized storage in the forums is >> not secury anyhow and signed messages could be swapped easily with the >> next hack of the forums. >> >> Is that use case taken care of in any plans already? >> >> I thought about abusing pgp keyservers but that would suit for single >> vanity addresses only. >> It seems webfinger could be part of a solution where servers of a >> business can tell and proof you if a specific address is owned by them. >> >> [0] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D502538 >> [1] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3D505095 >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------= ------ >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development --=20 Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/