summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/53/06b361326568dbb2cf8e6484cb3ab60dc5ab9c
blob: 3d411057f7139283ec5881fe4ee6302c91298b21 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
Return-Path: <luke@dashjr.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
	[172.17.192.35])
	by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E92DF258
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:54:13 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org (zinan.dashjr.org [192.3.11.21])
	by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 946A0103
	for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
	Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:54:13 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
	[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:61b6:56a6:b03d:28d6])
	(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
	by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3241A38A46D1;
	Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:54:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Hashcash: 1:25:151022:justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org::NcwrfARX02VUdkV9:3hBs
X-Hashcash: 1:25:151022:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org::wLRI8iMbKVqK9U0Q:9jIv
To: Justus Ranvier <justus@openbitcoinprivacyproject.org>,
	"Bitcoin Dev" <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
From: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:53:59 +0000
X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F
X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F
X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-15"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201510220554.00367.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
	autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
	smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 08:43:51 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Bitcoin-development] Reusable payment codes
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
	<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 05:54:14 -0000

On Friday, April 24, 2015 8:00:46 PM Justus Ranvier wrote:
> This link contains an RFC for a new type of Bitcoin address called a
> "payment code"

Sorry for the late review. I'm concerned with the "notification address" 
requirement, which entails address reuse and blockchain spam. Since it entails 
address reuse, the recipient is forced to either leave them unspent forever 
(bloating the UTXO set), or spend it which potentially compromises the private 
key, and (combined with the payment code) possibly as much as the entire 
wallet.

Instead, I suggest making it a single zero-value OP_RETURN output with two 
pushes: 1) a hash of the recipient's payment code, and 2) the encrypted 
payment code. This can be searched with standard bloom filters, or indexed 
with whatever other optimised algorithms are desired. At the same time, it 
never uses any space in the UTXO set, and never needs to be 
spent/mixed/dusted.

Luke