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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <luke@dashjr.org>) id 1Vh672-0001lv-FA
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 14 Nov 2013 23:14:12 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([192.3.11.21])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1Vh670-00063l-5J for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 14 Nov 2013 23:14:12 +0000
Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown
[IPv6:2001:470:5:265:be5f:f4ff:febf:4f76])
(Authenticated sender: luke-jr)
by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 15F641080833;
Thu, 14 Nov 2013 23:14:12 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Luke-Jr" <luke@dashjr.org>
To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2013 23:13:59 +0000
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.12.0; KDE/4.10.5; x86_64; ; )
References: <CAKaEYhK4oXH3hB7uS3=AEkA6r0VB5OYyTua+LOP18rq+rYajHg@mail.gmail.com>
<201311142301.39550.luke@dashjr.org> <5285589E.10707@monetize.io>
In-Reply-To: <5285589E.10707@monetize.io>
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-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201311142314.00978.luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
X-Headers-End: 1Vh670-00063l-5J
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] moving the default display to mbtc
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, 14 Nov 2013 23:14:12 -0000
On Thursday, November 14, 2013 11:11:26 PM Mark Friedenbach wrote:
> "key id" (thanks sipa).
>
> I know it's a more technical term, but that is rather the point. It
> was a fundamental error to call hashed-pubkeys "addresses" as people
> either associate this with "account" or physical addresses, which also
> rarely change.
>
> Security and privacy guarantees of the system are defeated when key
> pairs are reused. We should ideally adopt terminology that lead people
> to associations of ephemeral, temporary use. "key id" is at least
> neutral in this regard. Can anyone think of something better?
Keys are often reused, so not sure that conveys the single-use much better.
Reason I suggested invoice id is because nobody wants to pay the same invoice
twice.
Luke
|