Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.160.42 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.160.42;
	envelope-from=christophe.biocca@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-pb0-f42.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20140120223502.GA1055@petertodd.org>
References: <CAJna-HjGHpru6Lpv_tXUkWR2mX-=fobzojtHYvSRJy6+CMesOA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CANg-TZCrpT-YJ0WV9VY6w-PtCiz2YRMBCMvmjneDz13j2namkw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140120223502.GA1055@petertodd.org>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 18:06:24 -0500
Message-ID: <CANOOu=_pVCPiDtbqc3EwToZWzjLw4UqOvpsu2Wrt4eDKC7g_2g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Christophe Biocca <christophe.biocca@gmail.com>
To: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net"
	<bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP0039: Final call
Precedence: list

I remember the wordlist choice getting bikeshedded to death a month ago.

I would just include the wordlist as part of the standard (as a
recommendation) so that fully compliant implementations can correct a
user's typos regardless of the original generator.

Those who don't like it will have to deal with the compatibility
concerns themselves, or get an alternate wordlist approved as a BIP.
Odds are no one will go that route.

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 04:05:14PM -0600, Brooks Boyd wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 11:42 AM, slush <slush@centrum.cz> wrote:
>>
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > during recent months we've reconsidered all comments which we received
>> > from the community about our BIP39 proposal and we tried to meet all
>> > requirements for such standard. Specifically the proposal now doesn't
>> > require any specific wordlist, so every client can use its very own list of
>> > preferred words. Generated mnemonic can be then applied to any other
>> > BIP39-compatible client. Please follow current draft at
>> > https://github.com/trezor/bips/blob/master/bip-0039.mediawiki.
>>
>> So, because the [mnemonic]->[bip32 root] is just hashing, you've
>> effectively made your "mnemonic sentence" into a brainwallet? Since every
>> mnemonic sentence can now lead to a bip32 root, and only the client that
>> created the mnemonic can verify the mnemonic passes its checksum (assuming
>> all clients use different wordlists, the only client that can help you if
>> you fat-finger the sentence is the client that created it)?
>
> That issue is more than enough to get a NACK from me on making the
> current BIP39 draft a standard - I can easily see that leading to users
> losing a lot of money.
>
> Have any wallets implemented BIP39 this way already in released code?
>
> --
> 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
> 00000000000000009c3092c0b245722363df8b29cfbb86368f4f7303e655983a
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> CenturyLink Cloud: The Leader in Enterprise Cloud Services.
> Learn Why More Businesses Are Choosing CenturyLink Cloud For
> Critical Workloads, Development Environments & Everything In Between.
> Get a Quote or Start a Free Trial Today.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=119420431&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>