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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1VsWU3-0002Xk-QU
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 16 Dec 2013 11:37:11 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.214.49 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.214.49; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com;
helo=mail-bk0-f49.google.com;
Received: from mail-bk0-f49.google.com ([209.85.214.49])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1VsWU2-0000YL-VA
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Mon, 16 Dec 2013 11:37:11 +0000
Received: by mail-bk0-f49.google.com with SMTP id my13so2264004bkb.36
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Mon, 16 Dec 2013 03:37:04 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.204.236.134 with SMTP id kk6mr166443bkb.151.1387193824478;
Mon, 16 Dec 2013 03:37:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.204.69.197 with HTTP; Mon, 16 Dec 2013 03:37:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1387190808.12225.60115997.547B23B6@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <CANAnSg0QnZQ2BNJRYm1SD4HePZJQZy3GuAejLXYH+rLFn34CtA@mail.gmail.com>
<1387190808.12225.60115997.547B23B6@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 12:37:04 +0100
Message-ID: <CA+s+GJB+qvYBhjzvut2WJCeVc35nmwwUwQM45w_6BYwbw2UawA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com>
To: Jim <jim618@fastmail.co.uk>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf302238fd24b7a504eda53bff
X-Spam-Score: -0.6 (/)
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
(laanwj[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked.
See
http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block
for more information. [URIs: fastmail.co.uk]
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
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
X-Headers-End: 1VsWU2-0000YL-VA
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Fees UI warning
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: Mon, 16 Dec 2013 11:37:11 -0000
--20cf302238fd24b7a504eda53bff
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Jim <jim618@fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> For the HD version of MultiBit we are removing the import
> of individual private keys entirely and only supporting HD
> addresses, primarily for safety reasons.
>
I'd love to have the same in Bitcoin-Qt as well. Too many sob stories about
people with outdated backups that lost part or all of their coins. These
are much more common than fee messups.
What we should really do is:
- Use deterministic wallets. Making regular backups becomes optional (to
retain label and transaction data and such) instead of mandatory.
- Don't support importing private keys. Replace the importing of private
keys by a "sweep" function.
Wladimir
--20cf302238fd24b7a504eda53bff
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">On M=
on, Dec 16, 2013 at 11:46 AM, Jim <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mailto:j=
im618@fastmail.co.uk" target=3D"_blank">jim618@fastmail.co.uk</a>></span=
> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">For the HD version of MultiBit we are removi=
ng the import<br>
of individual private keys entirely and only supporting HD<br>
addresses, primarily for safety reasons.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><di=
v>I'd love to have the same in Bitcoin-Qt as well. Too many sob stories=
about people with outdated backups that lost part or all of their coins. T=
hese are much more common than fee messups.</div>
<div><br></div><div>What we should really do is:</div><div><br></div><div>-=
Use deterministic wallets. Making regular backups becomes optional (to ret=
ain label and transaction data and such) instead of mandatory.</div><div>
<br></div><div>- Don't support importing private keys. Replace the impo=
rting of private keys by a "sweep" function.</div><div><br></div>=
<div>Wladimir</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>
--20cf302238fd24b7a504eda53bff--
|
