correct.
Fare enough, if the Devs say upgrade, and you want to still use their software, you do as they ask, best way for security that they can implement.
Click the "request" button under "payment" (the actual words might differ, doing this from memory)
yep, I see it, it also changes address each time..
Yes, AFAIK there is no list of addresses either. I think they tried to hide the address concept as much as possible so people dont think the address is their wallet or something similar. If you consider an address a one time use thing, it makes sense.
You cant import keys, so you cant have a vanity address with Multibit HD at all. Address reuse is bad practice, so it is not encouraged with HD either. You can however safe the first address you get and reuse it.
so tip jars are bad practice? mining target addresses are bad practice? here I thought bad security (simple passwords/phrases) was the bad practice.
even if I uses multi addresses that all run off one key, if that key was "Password", its not 1 address compromised, its all of them. Please prove me wrong.
Different scenarios. A good password is a defense against an attacker that tries to steal your coins and already compromised your machine/wallet file. Avoiding reuse of addresses is a defense against an attacker that tries to learn about your wealth. Having a single address to receive multiple payment is perfectly fine if you dont care about that.
Keep in mind that Multibit HD heavily - even more so than classic - focuses on users that have next to no knowledge about bitcoin and its inner workings. You might have outgrown the wallet if it no longer meets your demands. Its still a very good wallet IMHO, just not a one size fits all.
I understand the concept to "spread you BTC over different addresses", but I don't see how using the same key to several addresses makes any difference to security.
Its only a security issue in case of a ECDSA attack, which is hardly a common scenario to defend against.
Also, cant import keys? how you Blockchain.info to *.wallet then? is that not "importing" a key?
Not sure what "to *.wallet" means, but it sounds like the multibit classic import process. Classic lets you import, HD not.
If its such a big deal stay with classic. It still gets crucial updates.
um, did not the author want to drop classic? if not, why HD then? why not continue with classic? what am I missing here?
Well HD is certainly an improvement.
#1 better brute force protection. HD is ~10000 slower to attack, at least on my CPU.
#2 HD backup scheme via seeds
#3 arguably better design
#4 hardware wallet support
#5 probably more that Im missing.
It also comes with regular automated (or forced if you want to see it like that) donations to the devs. Which may or may not be a downside for you.
Show Posts
