📅 Original date posted:2019-10-06
📝 Original message:On Saturday 05 October 2019 21:57:48 Emil Engler via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> Hello dear mailing list subscribers.
> Before I'll explain my idea here, I need to define a term first
>
> 'address':
> When I use the terms address, pubkey, etc., I mean the same: The Base58
> string
But a pubkey is not a Base58 string, and fundamentally different from an
address. An address identifies the recipient and the purpose of the payment;
a pubkey does not. The pubkey remains with the UTXO; an address does not.
> Ok now let's get into it:
> As you should know, sending bitcoins to an address more than once is a
> very bad approach.
> In my opinion the problem why so many people are still doing this is
> because of the term 'address' which is used in lots of wallets,
> implementations, BIP 21 and so on. It is a design issue.
> With the term 'address' most people identify things that are fixed and
> don't change really often (e.g postal address, IP address [depends on
> provider], Domain, E-Mail address, ...).
> Because of this most people compare bitcoin addresses with e-mail
> addresses and use this address to send the recipient money multiple times.
That problem would require using a different term than "address" to address.
A BIP is unlikely to do the job (though it may help).
> My suggestion would be to change the term address in wallets, the URI
> scheme and so on to something of the following options by a
> Informational/Process BIP:
>
> * Payment Password
> * Transaction Password
> * ...
Neither the address nor pubkey are a password...
Some possible alternative terms would be "invoice id", "payment token", etc.
> The guideline for the term should indicate that it is:
> * temporary
> * Something that identifies the recipient
>
> I've chosen 'password' because they can be used as a pseudonym to
> identify a person.
> This is already used in stuff like bank transfers where something like
> the transaction id should be used as the purpose or at universities
> there are student numbers.
> The first is probably a better example because student numbers aren't
> temporary.
>
> What do you think? Should I write a BIP for this or use another term?
> Feedback is most welcome :)
>
> Greetings,
> Emil Engler
Luke Dashjr [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tf…rfq0n
2023-06-07 18:21:07
in reply to nevent1q…7tqs
Author Public Key
npub1tfk373zg9dnmtvxnpnq7s2dkdgj37rwfj3yrwld7830qltmv8qps8rfq0nPublished at
2023-06-07 18:21:07Event JSON
{
"id": "f518c157539b924ffec8b6b80fff9075bf2f9a3dc014f6a5e3f8b459026c519d",
"pubkey": "5a6d1f44482b67b5b0d30cc1e829b66a251f0dc99448377dbe3c5e0faf6c3803",
"created_at": 1686162067,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"2ceb005983bccb8ed869797f1f19e941c30d02f7f4665d5fde474752d18fab44",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"02aab66785999687a3783c7016e48cd9a12be1a8db8c21e2b564bc1a0e29710a",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"6020dca142bfa9e8b09e00fa64ed9b062c57b63ab8b04e05667e4f849475103f"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2019-10-06\n📝 Original message:On Saturday 05 October 2019 21:57:48 Emil Engler via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e Hello dear mailing list subscribers.\n\u003e Before I'll explain my idea here, I need to define a term first\n\u003e\n\u003e 'address':\n\u003e When I use the terms address, pubkey, etc., I mean the same: The Base58\n\u003e string\n\nBut a pubkey is not a Base58 string, and fundamentally different from an \naddress. An address identifies the recipient and the purpose of the payment; \na pubkey does not. The pubkey remains with the UTXO; an address does not.\n\n\u003e Ok now let's get into it:\n\u003e As you should know, sending bitcoins to an address more than once is a\n\u003e very bad approach.\n\u003e In my opinion the problem why so many people are still doing this is\n\u003e because of the term 'address' which is used in lots of wallets,\n\u003e implementations, BIP 21 and so on. It is a design issue.\n\u003e With the term 'address' most people identify things that are fixed and\n\u003e don't change really often (e.g postal address, IP address [depends on\n\u003e provider], Domain, E-Mail address, ...).\n\u003e Because of this most people compare bitcoin addresses with e-mail\n\u003e addresses and use this address to send the recipient money multiple times.\n\nThat problem would require using a different term than \"address\" to address.\nA BIP is unlikely to do the job (though it may help).\n\n\u003e My suggestion would be to change the term address in wallets, the URI\n\u003e scheme and so on to something of the following options by a\n\u003e Informational/Process BIP:\n\u003e\n\u003e * Payment Password\n\u003e * Transaction Password\n\u003e * ...\n\nNeither the address nor pubkey are a password...\n\nSome possible alternative terms would be \"invoice id\", \"payment token\", etc.\n\n\u003e The guideline for the term should indicate that it is:\n\u003e * temporary\n\u003e * Something that identifies the recipient\n\u003e\n\u003e I've chosen 'password' because they can be used as a pseudonym to\n\u003e identify a person.\n\u003e This is already used in stuff like bank transfers where something like\n\u003e the transaction id should be used as the purpose or at universities\n\u003e there are student numbers.\n\u003e The first is probably a better example because student numbers aren't\n\u003e temporary.\n\u003e\n\u003e What do you think? Should I write a BIP for this or use another term?\n\u003e Feedback is most welcome :)\n\u003e\n\u003e Greetings,\n\u003e Emil Engler",
"sig": "e3cc4bde3d92f46984797e4295b026d47f0c7775809c54744a0bb45adb3526b7a012b2f3d7b86f9ed8ae357be6d79d6105ce77bb9529fd12546a37270a170948"
}