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
125
126
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>) id 1WNow9-00011d-Im
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:35:33 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of me.com
designates 17.172.220.236 as permitted sender)
client-ip=17.172.220.236; envelope-from=jeanpaulkogelman@me.com;
helo=st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com;
Received: from st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com ([17.172.220.236])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WNow8-0001y9-FN for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:35:33 +0000
Received: from st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com ([17.172.220.247])
by st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit
(built Aug
22 2013)) with ESMTP id <0N2C005M092Z0CA0@st11p02mm-asmtp001.mac.com>
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed,
12 Mar 2014 19:35:27 +0000 (GMT)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure
engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87,1.0.14,0.0.0000
definitions=2014-03-12_07:2014-03-12, 2014-03-12,
1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0
suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam
adjust=0
reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1401130000
definitions=main-1403120111
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_8Tr4drEudGhoHcC13OkNTA)"
Received: from localhost ([17.172.220.223]) by st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit
(built Aug
30 2012)) with ESMTP id <0N2C002QJ92ZWV30@st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com>;
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:35:23 +0000 (GMT)
To: Gary Rowe <g.rowe@froot.co.uk>
From: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:35:23 +0000 (GMT)
X-Mailer: iCloud MailClient14A49 MailServer14A.15417
X-Originating-IP: [159.153.138.53]
Message-id: <8349e85f-838a-4d93-9302-48b12af03940@me.com>
In-reply-to: <CAKm8k+3bbhN=Kf2thvtakA7EGcTHDn1ssQm-+Fwf3hAAQmndTQ@mail.gmail.com>
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 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars
X-Headers-End: 1WNow8-0001y9-FN
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] Proposal: Base58 encoded HD Wallet
root key with optional encryption
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: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 19:35:33 -0000
--Boundary_(ID_8Tr4drEudGhoHcC13OkNTA)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
=0A=0AOn Mar 12, 2014, at 09:49 AM, Gary Rowe <g.rowe@froot.co.uk> wrote:=0A=
=0AJean-Paul, it may be worth noting that the BIP39 word list is integrate=
d into Bitcoinj so will likely become the de facto standard for Android, T=
rezor web and several desktop wallets. Anyone deviating from that word lis=
t would likely find themselves in an isolated pocket.=0A=0ARegarding the t=
imestamp, MultiBit HD uses a simple timestamp of "number of days since mid=
night of Bitcoin genesis block in UTC with modulo 97 checksum appended". T=
hus a new seed generated on 27 January 2014 would have "1850/01" as its ch=
ecksum.=0A=A0=0AI'm a bit confused, are you changing the way the checksum =
is calculated, or fudging the input seed to produce a specific checksum? O=
r is checksum in this case another value calculated over the mnemonic list=
?=0A=0A=0AWhen creating a new wallet the users are tested that they have w=
ritten the timestamp down along with the associated 12/18/24 words.=0A=0AS=
o this is specific to MultiBit HD? Wouldn't it be better to include this i=
nto the BIP?=A0=0A=0A=
--Boundary_(ID_8Tr4drEudGhoHcC13OkNTA)
Content-type: multipart/related;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_5/EzsZMLDUlc8+Y9jmAMoA)"; type="text/html"
--Boundary_(ID_5/EzsZMLDUlc8+Y9jmAMoA)
Content-type: text/html; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
<html><body><div><br><br>On Mar 12, 2014, at 09:49 AM, Gary Rowe <g.rowe@froot.co.u=
k> wrote:<br><br></div><div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div class=3D"msg=
-quote"><div dir=3D"ltr">Jean-Paul, it may be worth noting that the BIP39 =
word list is integrated into Bitcoinj so will likely become the de facto s=
tandard for Android, Trezor web and several desktop wallets. Anyone deviat=
ing from that word list would likely find themselves in an isolated pocket=
.<div><br></div><div>Regarding the timestamp, MultiBit HD uses a simple ti=
mestamp of "number of days since midnight of Bitcoin genesis block in UTC =
with modulo 97 checksum appended". Thus a new seed generated on 27 January=
2014 would have "1850/01" as its checksum. </div></div></div></blockquote=
><span> </span></div><div>I'm a bit confused, are you changing the wa=
y the checksum is calculated, or fudging the input seed to produce a speci=
fic checksum? Or is checksum in this case another value calculated over th=
e mnemonic list?</div><div><br></div><div><br><blockquote type=3D"cite"><d=
iv class=3D"msg-quote"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div>When creating a new wallet th=
e users are tested that they have written the timestamp down along with th=
e associated 12/18/24 words.</div><div></div></div></div></blockquote><spa=
n><div><span><br></span></div>So this is specific to MultiBit HD? Wouldn't=
it be better to include this into the BIP? </span></div><div><br></d=
iv></body></html>=
--Boundary_(ID_5/EzsZMLDUlc8+Y9jmAMoA)--
--Boundary_(ID_8Tr4drEudGhoHcC13OkNTA)--
|
