Why Nostr? What is Njump?
2023-06-07 11:31:36

Rick Wesson [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: ๐Ÿ“… Original date posted:2013-02-11 ๐Ÿ“ Original message:I prefer to leverage the ...

๐Ÿ“… Original date posted:2013-02-11
๐Ÿ“ Original message:I prefer to leverage the signing of the (.) root in the DNS tree. The
amount of effort in signing the root holds more weight than building a CA
off the bitcoin blockchain.

If you want to associate identifiers for payment addresses I suggest
putting those in DNSSEC signed records in the DNS.

For routing around x.509 CAs I suggest participating in the DANE working
group in the IETF.

-rick


On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 2:03 AM, Timo Hanke <timo.hanke at web.de> wrote:

> There have been proposals to use the blockchain to establish
> "identities". firstbits is a simple example. I would like to announce a
> project that extends this idea to turn the blockchain into a "root CA"
> that can sign arbitrary certificates. The purpose is to use these
> certificates in the payment protocol, where some might consider
> traditional centralized root CAs unsatisfactory.
>
> Code is here: https://github.com/bcpki
>
> Technical specification and full-length examples are found in the wiki.
> I therefore spare myself from repeating the details here, even though,
> of course, discussion about those details is welcome on this list.
>
> Excerpt from README.md follows:
>
> First, we have drafted a quite general specification for bitcoin
> certificates (protobuf messages) that allow for a variety of payment
> protocols (e.g. static as well as customer-side-generated payment
> addresses).
> This part has surely been done elsewhere as well and is orthogonal to the
> goal of this project.
> What is new here is the signatures _under_ the certificates.
>
> We have patched the bitcoind to handle certificates, submit signatures to
> the blockchain, verify certificates against the blockchain, pay directly to
> certificates (with various payment methods), revoke certificates.
> Signatures in the blockchain are stored entirely in the UTXO set (i.e. the
> unspend, unprunable outputs).
> This seems to make signature lookup and verification reasonably fast:
> it took us 10s in the mainnet test we performed (lookup is instant on the
> testnet, of course).
>
> Payment methods include: static bitcoin addresses, client-side derived
> payment addresses (pay-to-contract), pay-to-contract with multisig
> destinations (P2SH)
>
> Full-length real-world examples for all payment methods are provided in
> the tutorial pages.
> These examples have actually been carried out on testnet3.
>
> For further details and specifications see the wiki.
>
> timo hanke
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
> Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
> and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20130211/079342ad/attachment.html>;
Author Public Key
npub1xz8q68hmzur6c6uje593nscy3q4njx05h4vnxmz2wxxptx7u7casl2925u