📅 Original date posted:2022-10-18
📝 Original message:Hi Rijndael,
I think your thoughts are pretty much compatible with this proposal, as
what I'm describing (the recipient signing their keys) is also essentially
a form of authentication.
It's a good observation that in general this makes the communication of
addresses more secure. I do wish to re-emphasize Bryan's remark that you
still need to ensure the pubkey itself is securely communicated.
>depending on the setup, this could be that the address server also has the
Address Authentication privkey for bob, or it could be that bob gets some
callback or notification, or that bob has pre-signed a batch of addresses
In my opinion the only meaningful distinction is whether Bob runs the
Trustless Address Server himself (full privacy) or not. In either case I
see no reason to diverge from the model where Bob deposits a batch of
signed keys to the server, ensuring that no malicious addresses can be
handed out.
Note I discussed the Trustless Address Server design in the first 20
minutes of this podcast:
https://twitter.com/bitcoinoptech/status/1580573594656333825
And I also brought it up in my presentation at Tabconf last Saturday, but
that video isn't online yet.
Cheers,
Ruben
On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 2:07 AM Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 7:05 PM rot13maxi via bitcoin-dev <
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
>> Unbeknownst to them, the clipboard contents have been replaced with an
>> address controlled by some bad actor.
>>
> [snip]
>
>> Now imagine instead that the wallet has some address book with a pubkey
>> for each recipient the user wants to send bitcoin to.
>>
>
> Isn't this the same problem but now for copy-pasting pubkeys instead of an
> address?
>
> - Bryan
> https://twitter.com/kanzure
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20221018/090a0721/attachment.html>;
Ruben Somsen [ARCHIVE] /
npub1cn…qyeq0
2023-06-07 23:14:05
in reply to nevent1q…ycrr
Author Public Key
npub1cnrnujx86le38yu2jrt3la0yhewsrh2p2lucakv6mu28x7lm0rsq9qyeq0Published at
2023-06-07 23:14:05Event JSON
{
"id": "368af7f1c3188f598c032862ff1aaffb208010f58884edf7436b2d0915dc7a30",
"pubkey": "c4c73e48c7d7f313938a90d71ff5e4be5d01dd4157f98ed99adf14737bfb78e0",
"created_at": 1686179645,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ea43f2af105feface907b52de43940c36932ecd5ba849c28f38155d42df5d943",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"72075e5921fdc65da59cba39798e9b5078cc90085eec6dc3eccc5ed799b59438",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"62ddcb547224b421822b62845fb1bbd77c838b924bd022814cfcbe25b7a07475"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2022-10-18\n📝 Original message:Hi Rijndael,\n\nI think your thoughts are pretty much compatible with this proposal, as\nwhat I'm describing (the recipient signing their keys) is also essentially\na form of authentication.\n\nIt's a good observation that in general this makes the communication of\naddresses more secure. I do wish to re-emphasize Bryan's remark that you\nstill need to ensure the pubkey itself is securely communicated.\n\n\u003edepending on the setup, this could be that the address server also has the\nAddress Authentication privkey for bob, or it could be that bob gets some\ncallback or notification, or that bob has pre-signed a batch of addresses\n\nIn my opinion the only meaningful distinction is whether Bob runs the\nTrustless Address Server himself (full privacy) or not. In either case I\nsee no reason to diverge from the model where Bob deposits a batch of\nsigned keys to the server, ensuring that no malicious addresses can be\nhanded out.\n\nNote I discussed the Trustless Address Server design in the first 20\nminutes of this podcast:\nhttps://twitter.com/bitcoinoptech/status/1580573594656333825\n\nAnd I also brought it up in my presentation at Tabconf last Saturday, but\nthat video isn't online yet.\n\nCheers,\nRuben\n\n\n\nOn Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 2:07 AM Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev \u003c\nbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\n\u003e On Mon, Oct 17, 2022 at 7:05 PM rot13maxi via bitcoin-dev \u003c\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Unbeknownst to them, the clipboard contents have been replaced with an\n\u003e\u003e address controlled by some bad actor.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e [snip]\n\u003e\n\u003e\u003e Now imagine instead that the wallet has some address book with a pubkey\n\u003e\u003e for each recipient the user wants to send bitcoin to.\n\u003e\u003e\n\u003e\n\u003e Isn't this the same problem but now for copy-pasting pubkeys instead of an\n\u003e address?\n\u003e\n\u003e - Bryan\n\u003e https://twitter.com/kanzure\n\u003e _______________________________________________\n\u003e bitcoin-dev mailing list\n\u003e bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\n\u003e https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev\n\u003e\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20221018/090a0721/attachment.html\u003e",
"sig": "aed4fe62e28c60d69fe9036109cbd177088979447721b29e485b0401a7776c82767f5913cb2e49c4f6cc411b2d9eeb264167a8cc3ff2124a3b55c7614af51a34"
}