📅 Original date posted:2014-04-22
📝 Original message:>
>
> > - Please allow M=1. From a usability point of view it makes sense to
> allow
> > the user to select 1 share if that is what he wants.
>
> How does that make sense? Decomposing a key/seed into 1 share is
> functionally equivalent to dispensing with the secret sharing scheme
> entirely.
>
>
I agree that it may look silly to have just one-of-one share from a
technical point of view, but from an end-user point of view there could be
reasons for just having one piece of paper to manage. If M can be 1 then
the software/hardware doesn't have to support multiple formats,
import/export paths + UI (one for SIPA keys in one share, one for HD seeds
in one share, one for SIPA keys + HD seeds in multiple shares).
Less complexity & more freedom of choice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140422/50e835f2/attachment.html>;
Jan Møller [ARCHIVE] /
npub1sv…jg7a4
2023-06-07 15:17:10
in reply to nevent1q…t8qa
Author Public Key
npub1sv4psc5psjztuewa8xzcxrdsm743zl3lvje7ha36xp3da86hmpyqdjg7a4Published at
2023-06-07 15:17:10Event JSON
{
"id": "0064f4e027f976960c08c85d70570adf266a5bb16ca321b13ece65fe6fbf7cac",
"pubkey": "832a1862818484be65dd3985830db0dfab117e3f64b3ebf63a3062de9f57d848",
"created_at": 1686151030,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ec3db7ea61043d2181c683590cc6472afc1e727a155c1437be680d2ee4f9939c",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"606d2ad25cab21886dc853643411c0cc99c3a9262f362f32cc51292fbda27d73",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"f00d0858b09287e941ccbc491567cc70bdbc62d714628b167c1b76e7fef04d91"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2014-04-22\n📝 Original message:\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e \u003e - Please allow M=1. From a usability point of view it makes sense to\n\u003e allow\n\u003e \u003e the user to select 1 share if that is what he wants.\n\u003e\n\u003e How does that make sense? Decomposing a key/seed into 1 share is\n\u003e functionally equivalent to dispensing with the secret sharing scheme\n\u003e entirely.\n\u003e\n\u003e\nI agree that it may look silly to have just one-of-one share from a\ntechnical point of view, but from an end-user point of view there could be\nreasons for just having one piece of paper to manage. If M can be 1 then\nthe software/hardware doesn't have to support multiple formats,\nimport/export paths + UI (one for SIPA keys in one share, one for HD seeds\nin one share, one for SIPA keys + HD seeds in multiple shares).\n\nLess complexity \u0026 more freedom of choice.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140422/50e835f2/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "d7335958e140e9566480ba682a1415a30a86070c29e60c9da056e76879cd8d8566ee35a7b9992469910a96087c20187fe5a2687656d8e5924ee7b3dec4f46790"
}