đź“… Original date posted:2021-02-19
đź“ť Original message:I never liked BIP70. It was too complex, had too many features, and when
people discuss it, they do not even agree on what the main feature was.
Nevertheless, there is ONE feature of BIP70 that I find useful: the fact
that payment requests were signed. I am making this post to discuss this.
When I send bitcoins to an exchange, I would like to receive a signed
request. I want to have a proof that the exchange asked me to send coins
to that address, in case it has been hijacked by some intern working
there. If that feature was implemented by an exchange, it would guide my
decision to use that exchange over its competitors.
I do not think that a single exchange ever implemented that, but I guess
this is because BIP70 is a terrible standard. LN payment requests are
signed, do not require SSL, do not require interactivity, and therefore
exchanges use them. Can't we achieve the same for on-chain payments? Is
anyone working on that?
I would be more than happy to remove BIP70 support from Electrum, if
there was another standard for signed requests.
Thomas
--
Electrum Technologies GmbH / Paul-Lincke-Ufer 8d / 10999 Berlin / Germany
Sitz, Registergericht: Berlin, Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 164636
Geschäftsführer: Thomas Voegtlin
Thomas Voegtlin [ARCHIVE] /
npub10f…7ej47
2023-06-07 18:29:05
in reply to nevent1q…gnt8
Author Public Key
npub10f96gqrsu4qpygfgvuvzce47aavjvql703egfde0l2hua8dzpszs67ej47Published at
2023-06-07 18:29:05Event JSON
{
"id": "b67ccd2cea6662297b9980c30d32828947043669839dbdb44363d8a6f027d551",
"pubkey": "7a4ba40070e54012212867182c66beef592603fe7c7284b72ffaafce9da20c05",
"created_at": 1686162545,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"e0c8af14f61fb098c5d075d9d55d62a7f182570e06314fc49493f7f70ee3619e",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2021-02-19\n📝 Original message:I never liked BIP70. It was too complex, had too many features, and when\npeople discuss it, they do not even agree on what the main feature was.\n\nNevertheless, there is ONE feature of BIP70 that I find useful: the fact\nthat payment requests were signed. I am making this post to discuss this.\n\nWhen I send bitcoins to an exchange, I would like to receive a signed\nrequest. I want to have a proof that the exchange asked me to send coins\nto that address, in case it has been hijacked by some intern working\nthere. If that feature was implemented by an exchange, it would guide my\ndecision to use that exchange over its competitors.\n\nI do not think that a single exchange ever implemented that, but I guess\nthis is because BIP70 is a terrible standard. LN payment requests are\nsigned, do not require SSL, do not require interactivity, and therefore\nexchanges use them. Can't we achieve the same for on-chain payments? Is\nanyone working on that?\n\nI would be more than happy to remove BIP70 support from Electrum, if\nthere was another standard for signed requests.\n\nThomas\n\n-- \nElectrum Technologies GmbH / Paul-Lincke-Ufer 8d / 10999 Berlin / Germany\nSitz, Registergericht: Berlin, Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 164636\nGeschäftsführer: Thomas Voegtlin",
"sig": "bda45f5342143c1dfa4bc05b1453efb2b8f433aa4ca46846cdb3b6e3efc8260df72ebd63cf96941134fd63e7e852be82a633ee70f7a6e0086d1ffc8fa9926c68"
}