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
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <pw@vps7135.xlshosting.net>) id 1UZhoS-0002qR-Hp
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 07 May 2013 13:20:12 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from vps7135.xlshosting.net ([178.18.90.41])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1UZhoC-00052d-Kl for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Tue, 07 May 2013 13:20:12 +0000
Received: by vps7135.xlshosting.net (Postfix, from userid 1000)
id 954D033CF96; Tue, 7 May 2013 15:19:50 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 15:19:50 +0200
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Adam Back <adam@cypherspace.org>
Message-ID: <20130507131948.GA4231@vps7135.xlshosting.net>
References: <20130507121641.GA11770@netbook.cypherspace.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20130507121641.GA11770@netbook.cypherspace.org>
X-PGP-Key: http://sipa.ulyssis.org/pubkey.asc
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com)
0.0 DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED No valid author signature, adsp_override is
CUSTOM_MED
-1.3 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain 1.2 NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED ADSP custom_med hit,
and not from a mailing list
0.0 TIME_LIMIT_EXCEEDED Exceeded time limit / deadline
X-Headers-End: 1UZhoC-00052d-Kl
Cc: Bitcoin-Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] minor bitcoin-qt gripes moving BTC off
specific key
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: Tue, 07 May 2013 13:20:12 -0000
On Tue, May 07, 2013 at 02:16:41PM +0200, Adam Back wrote:
> Hi
>
> Three minor security/other issues:
>
> 1. please a way to unlock the wallet without displaying wallet password in
> console screen (console unlock wallet, to import priv key); or
I think the general solution here is providing a feature-reach Python RPC client,
which can do things like remember passwords, command history/tab completion,
perhaps even batch lookups of compound commands (getblock $(getblockhash X, for
example, ...). The naive RPC client built into bitcoind is not a good fit for
many features, as they can much more efficiently be developed outside of the
core binary,
> 2. a button to import a private key (and option to transfer it to another
> key - if you are not the sole controller the private key)
I'm quite opposed to any per-key fiddling in the GUI. This will inevitably lead
to (even more) people misunderstanding how wallets work and shooting themself in
the foot. I don't mind an expert mode ("coin control") that enables such features,
but in general, we should for entire-wallet export and import rather than
individual keys.
Import & sweep an address is something else, that sounds safe to.
> 3. a UX way to transfer BTC off a specific adress (eg choose from
> address), rather than having to spend the entire wallet onto a new
> address, just to get BTC off a specific address. Doing it that way has
> problems: creates more network traffic/bigger packets, higher fees (if
> any transactions are young/low confirmation), and generally damages
> privacy as all your funds end up linked.
This belongs in coin control, IMHO.
--
Pieter
|
