Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 15:19:50 +0200
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Message-ID: <20130507131948.GA4231@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
References: <20130507121641.GA11770@netbook.cypherspace.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130507121641.GA11770@netbook.cypherspace.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: Bitcoin-Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] minor bitcoin-qt gripes moving BTC off
 specific key
Precedence: list

On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 02:16:41PM +0200, Adam Back wrote:
> Hi
> 
> Three minor security/other issues:
> 
> 1. please a way to unlock the wallet without displaying wallet password in
>    console screen (console unlock wallet, to import priv key); or 

I think the general solution here is providing a feature-reach Python RPC client,
which can do things like remember passwords, command history/tab completion,
perhaps even batch lookups of compound commands (getblock $(getblockhash X, for
example, ...). The naive RPC client built into bitcoind is not a good fit for
many features, as they can much more efficiently be developed outside of the
core binary,


> 2. a button to import a private key (and option to transfer it to another
>    key - if you are not the sole controller the private key)

I'm quite opposed to any per-key fiddling in the GUI. This will inevitably lead
to (even more) people misunderstanding how wallets work and shooting themself in
the foot. I don't mind an expert mode ("coin control") that enables such features,
but in general, we should for entire-wallet export and import rather than
individual keys.

Import & sweep an address is something else, that sounds safe to.

> 3. a UX way to transfer BTC off a specific adress (eg choose from
>    address), rather than having to spend the entire wallet onto a new
>    address, just to get BTC off a specific address.  Doing it that way has
>    problems: creates more network traffic/bigger packets, higher fees (if
>    any transactions are young/low confirmation), and generally damages
>    privacy as all your funds end up linked.

This belongs in coin control, IMHO.

-- 
Pieter