To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <20170927160654.GA12492@savin.petertodd.org>
	<CAAcC9yvdw4Yphs-prpckaouzaU21D=kGRqK+gG9SbPr-=27z9w@mail.gmail.com>
From: CryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0e625a3c-46fa-239f-e646-cf97ae226df0@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2017 13:11:09 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAcC9yvdw4Yphs-prpckaouzaU21D=kGRqK+gG9SbPr-=27z9w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
	boundary="------------DDDE22FFC9C6136C54289F11"
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Address expiration times should be added to
	BIP-173
Precedence: list

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------DDDE22FFC9C6136C54289F11
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

See https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9722

What still needs to be done is that during the first start up after
updating with this popup, the wallet needs to scan for addresses that
have been used in the past. That way the popup isn't only shown for
addresses that are reused after updating.


On 09/27/2017 12:35 PM, Chris Priest via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> A better solution is to just have the sending wallet check to see if
> the address you are about to send to has been used before. If it's a
> fresh address, it sends it through without any popup alert. If the
> address has history going back a certain amount of time, then a popup
> comes up and notifies the sender that they are sending to a non-fresh
> address that may no longer be controlled by the receiver anymore.
>
> Also, an even better idea is to set up an "address expiration
> service". When you delete a wallet, you first send off an "expiration
> notice" which is just a message (signed with the private key) saying
> "I am about to delete this address, here is my new address". When
> someone tries to send to that address, they first consult the address
> expiration service, and the service will either tell them "this
> address is not expired, proceed", or "this address has been expired,
> please send to this other address instead...". Basically like a 301
> redirect, but for addresses. I don't think address expiration should
> be part of the protocol.
>
...

--------------DDDE22FFC9C6136C54289F11
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
  </head>
  <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
    <p>See <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9722">https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/9722</a> <br>
    </p>
    <p>What still needs to be done is that during the first start up
      after updating with this popup, the wallet needs to scan for
      addresses that have been used in the past. That way the popup
      isn't only shown for addresses that are reused after updating.<br>
    </p>
    <br>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/27/2017 12:35 PM, Chris Priest
      via bitcoin-dev wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAAcC9yvdw4Yphs-prpckaouzaU21D=kGRqK+gG9SbPr-=27z9w@mail.gmail.com">
      <div dir="ltr">A better solution is to just have the sending
        wallet check to see if the address you are about to send to has
        been used before. If it's a fresh address, it sends it through
        without any popup alert. If the address has history going back a
        certain amount of time, then a popup comes up and notifies the
        sender that they are sending to a non-fresh address that may no
        longer be controlled by the receiver anymore.
        <div><br>
        </div>
        <div>Also, an even better idea is to set up an "address
          expiration service". When you delete a wallet, you first send
          off an "expiration notice" which is just a message (signed
          with the private key) saying "I am about to delete this
          address, here is my new address". When someone tries to send
          to that address, they first consult the address expiration
          service, and the service will either tell them "this address
          is not expired, proceed", or "this address has been expired,
          please send to this other address instead...". Basically like
          a 301 redirect, but for addresses. I don't think address
          expiration should be part of the protocol.</div>
      </div>
      <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    ...<br>
  </body>
</html>

--------------DDDE22FFC9C6136C54289F11--