📅 Original date posted:2016-08-16
📝 Original message:> I think it does not make sense to try to get this standardized for
> current Bitcoin transactions. They are just too complex.
>
> What might be interesting is to have something similar for Segwit and
> Lightning transactions.
>
> * TREZOR performs extended validation of the inputs, when all of
> prev-txs are streamed into the device and validated. Your standard does
> not tackle this at all and I don't think it's worthy to make this
> standard unnecessarily complicated.
I'm aware of this approach but I don't think this makes sense long term.
We need a better way on the protocol level to validate inputs amounts
(where segwit is a first step towards this).
IMO, not having a standard for hardware wallet interfaces/communication
will long term result in reducing the end user experience.
I think we should collaborate together and work out a standard.
My goal is to add hardware wallet support in Bitcoin-Core where adding
proprietary code (plugin-ish) is something we don't want to do for the
sake of security and compatibility.
As said, the "BIP" is very draft and I'm happy to include the input
streaming as part of it (or you could add it if you want because you
have more experience with it).
</jonas>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160816/75ee098a/attachment.sig>;
Jonas Schnelli [ARCHIVE] /
npub1nf…3dtxs
2023-06-07 17:52:47
in reply to nevent1q…mx5k
Author Public Key
npub1nfrrurat393mqymf3s26pujyn5vujlem3pzcukr5p9d4qpklngxq43dtxsPublished at
2023-06-07 17:52:47Event JSON
{
"id": "7fc40b104c521a3183c6b8ea3518c37ab41984614a5273057806912cf0e1d424",
"pubkey": "9a463e0fab8963b013698c15a0f2449d19c97f3b88458e5874095b5006df9a0c",
"created_at": 1686160367,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"6e7f7cb2c3110cb7289a3abd667304a3b4e6f9ba4e2581c492d7b93c214a5ea1",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"ab541c45fdd584d66f3f521fe3a7bd5dd0f9a8142546e3db8c39b12e2d3853dd",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"7631397e469f47f3535567311f5f7c17129e0ff2cb253df015e3d92ddfd92c63"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-08-16\n📝 Original message:\u003e I think it does not make sense to try to get this standardized for\n\u003e current Bitcoin transactions. They are just too complex.\n\u003e \n\u003e What might be interesting is to have something similar for Segwit and\n\u003e Lightning transactions.\n\u003e \n\u003e * TREZOR performs extended validation of the inputs, when all of\n\u003e prev-txs are streamed into the device and validated. Your standard does\n\u003e not tackle this at all and I don't think it's worthy to make this\n\u003e standard unnecessarily complicated.\n\nI'm aware of this approach but I don't think this makes sense long term.\nWe need a better way on the protocol level to validate inputs amounts\n(where segwit is a first step towards this).\n\nIMO, not having a standard for hardware wallet interfaces/communication\nwill long term result in reducing the end user experience.\n\nI think we should collaborate together and work out a standard.\n\nMy goal is to add hardware wallet support in Bitcoin-Core where adding\nproprietary code (plugin-ish) is something we don't want to do for the\nsake of security and compatibility.\n\nAs said, the \"BIP\" is very draft and I'm happy to include the input\nstreaming as part of it (or you could add it if you want because you\nhave more experience with it).\n\n\u003c/jonas\u003e\n\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 819 bytes\nDesc: OpenPGP digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160816/75ee098a/attachment.sig\u003e",
"sig": "9db36ef627cf328f79492700315dcf208585984b830a4d0aa96e62394f79ab94ec7e10809a9af82f27e6f8a79ada0f8446a916b0f65b7b5f91160eb95db2b0b5"
}