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
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
|
Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <mh.in.england@gmail.com>) id 1YJU6K-0005Bs-Dx
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 05 Feb 2015 21:36:40 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 74.125.82.52 as permitted sender)
client-ip=74.125.82.52; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com;
helo=mail-wg0-f52.google.com;
Received: from mail-wg0-f52.google.com ([74.125.82.52])
by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1YJU6I-0006cl-Uq
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 05 Feb 2015 21:36:40 +0000
Received: by mail-wg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id y19so9939217wgg.11
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Thu, 05 Feb 2015 13:36:33 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.7.199 with SMTP id l7mr504400wia.66.1423172192974; Thu,
05 Feb 2015 13:36:32 -0800 (PST)
Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com
Received: by 10.194.188.11 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 13:36:32 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <279489A5-1E46-48A2-8F58-1A25821D4D96@gmail.com>
References: <CABdy8DKS4arkkCLGC=66SUJm5Ugib1EWP7B6MkQRX1k-yd3WBw@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP3v=ySS4gragaWuBMWi_swocRRRq_kw2edo6+9kifgrFQ@mail.gmail.com>
<54D3D636.1030308@voskuil.org>
<CANEZrP3ekWQWeV=Yw_E=n0grORBLHaXLUh3w0EFQdz=HsjWvZw@mail.gmail.com>
<279489A5-1E46-48A2-8F58-1A25821D4D96@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 22:36:32 +0100
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ni2QRUDXQaXcNsGigiHQkJBRo88
Message-ID: <CANEZrP3VAWajxE=mNxb6sLSQbhaQHD=2TgRKvYrEax2PAzCi2A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
To: Brian Hoffman <brianchoffman@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044404900440f8050e5e1942
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(mh.in.england[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
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
0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
X-Headers-End: 1YJU6I-0006cl-Uq
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>,
Paul Puey <paul@airbitz.co>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for P2P Wireless (Bluetooth LE)
transfer of Payment URI
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 21:36:40 -0000
--f46d044404900440f8050e5e1942
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> This sounds horrible. You could basically monitor anyone with a wallet in
> a highly populated area and track them super easily by doing facial
> recognition.
>
We're talking about BLE, still? The radio tech that runs in the so called
"junk bands" because propagation is so poor?
My watch loses its connection to my phone if I just put it down and walk
around my apartment. I'm all for reasonable paranoia, but Bluetooth isn't
going to be enabling mass surveillance any time soon. It barely goes
through air, let alone walls.
Anyway, whatever. I'm just bouncing around ideas for faster user
interfaces. You could always switch it off or set it to be triggered by the
presence of particular wifi hotspots, if you don't mind an initial bit of
setup.
Back on topic - the debate is interesting, but I think to get this to the
stage of being a BIP we'd need at least another wallet to implement it?
Then I guess a BIP would be useful regardless of the design issues. The
prefix matching still feels flaky to me but it's hard to know if you could
really swipe payments out of the air in practice, without actually trying
it.
--f46d044404900440f8050e5e1942
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir=3D"auto"><div>This sounds horrible. You=
could basically monitor anyone with a wallet in a highly populated area an=
d track them super easily by doing facial recognition.</div></div></blockqu=
ote><div><br></div><div>We're talking about BLE, still? The radio tech =
that runs in the so called "junk bands" because propagation is so=
poor?</div><div><br></div><div>My watch loses its connection to my phone i=
f I just put it down and walk around my apartment. I'm all for reasonab=
le paranoia, but Bluetooth isn't going to be enabling mass surveillance=
any time soon. It barely goes through air, let alone walls.</div><div><br>=
</div><div>Anyway, whatever. I'm just bouncing around ideas for faster =
user interfaces. You could always switch it off or set it to be triggered b=
y the presence of particular wifi hotspots, if you don't mind an initia=
l bit of setup.</div><div><br></div><div>Back on topic - the debate is inte=
resting, but I think to get this to the stage of being a BIP we'd need =
at least another wallet to implement it? Then I guess a BIP would be useful=
regardless of the design issues. The prefix matching still feels flaky to =
me but it's hard to know if you could really swipe payments out of the =
air in practice, without actually trying it.</div><div><br></div><div><br><=
/div></div></div></div>
--f46d044404900440f8050e5e1942--
|
