We have successfully tested the model:
client -> proxy(transparent) -> bank.
That is to say, we can decrypt the session on the client side, have the proxy store/log the session in ONLY encrypted form, and then later pass across the session key and decrypt the log on the proxy (or any other machine).
To emphasise, we are NOT using mitm on the proxy. The proxy never sees decrypted data unless someone gives him the session key.
This was a proof of concept of the basic architecture. It's not a surprise that it basically works, there was no fundamental reason for it not to.
All based on open source: firefox, wireshark/tshark,squid. Good work. This is the coal-face of the interface with legacy banking and they must use internet technologies .... |
|
|
|
I know that OT uses 'mailboxes' for unsigned transactions and even invoices / messages etc. Is the idea to replace the mailbox infrastructure with BitMessage?
Or would all messages be directed to a specific OT server identified by a BM address and thus simply replace the HTTP protocol for communicating with an OT server?
Probably read the OP of the original idea will bring you up to speed. BM is just for P2P price discovery, not settlement, escrow or clearing functions. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=212490.msg2227866#msg2227866 |
|
|
|
|
Totally lost.
This one goes in the basket labelled - "Better to keep your mouth shut and have people wonder if you are an idiot than to open it and have all doubts removed."
|
|
|
|
Chris,
We have been working on your "holy grail" idea for a few months now (p2p payment / banking system). It operates on an internal currency, with a UI already designed. Please contact me via PM. I wasn't planning on making the project 'public' until we had everything up and running perfectly, but I didn't want to see you go through all this trouble and step on each other's toes when we already have an analogous solution being developed. We would be open to working with you to reach our common goal.
Dave
BitBank
Is your system based on Open-Transactions? ... if not you've just spammed a Project Development thread which is incredibly bad taste .... I contacted him via PM. Didn't intend to appear spammy. Ok. Apologies for jumping the gun there ... we all want the same thing, I think. |
|
|
|
"Digital currencies are just a financial service and those who deal in them are [financial institutions]," Jennifer Shasky Calvery This is simply Calvery's interpretation. The author has fallen for the fallacy that the word of law enforcement is the law ... it is not. They have no more power to interpret the law than the average citizen, and often times an agenda to interpret law to their advantage, to make their jobs easier, build empires, keep their "backers" happy, etc. Shasky Calvery needs to spend more time prosecuting real financial crimes like MF Global, LIBOR interest rate fixing, bailouts siphoned to bonuses and the like. And lightweights writing in American Banker need to clean their own stables before throwing it at others new, clean houses. P.O. |
|
|
|
I move that Jeffrey Tucker be made the new CEO of The Bitcoin Foundation ... his appreciation of the soul of the movement, the obstacles and various facets of the ideals at play is second to not many, imho. It was at this point that it finally struck me: This is not a currency only, or even mainly, for the rich tech world; it is a currency for the world's poor, who are desperately trying to become part of the global division of labor. These kinds of insights are rare and profound ... the depth of a digital monetary revolution can not be underestimated. There are forces of economy that will be unleashed that are barely understood. |
|
|
|
"Since the proposed system relies on the completely voluntary participation of Bitcoin users, the incentive to hold on to Bitcoins creates a serious problem." Can't believe this guy wrote this statement. Do they have a cookie-cutter for producing facists in economics somewhere? "Bitcoin is our currency, but it is your problem" ... fits about here I think. |
|
|
|
Adam : any chance you can get that stuff into Latex or some equation displayer ... my eye's are allergic to math with ascii text  One way is to write them at this site http://www.codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php... and link them into the text here either as gif or html if the forum supports it.(bit hacky but it works) |
|
|
|
Also actual API spec for bitmessage can be found here https://bitmessage.org/wiki/API_Referenceand dev just added these for just this kind of use addSubscription <address> [label] Subscribe to an address. label must be base64-encoded.
deleteSubscription <address> Unsubscribe from an address. The program does not check to see whether you were subscribed in the first place. |
|
|
|
|
I don't know why but the image of an adult kid, still in nappies, sucking on a pacifier clutching a mythical security blanket just jumped into my head.
|
|
|
|
Click on the link again and look at the author's byline. Harry Binswanger, Contributor
I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism.
Not exactly an unbiased source, and what a grand job he has done defending laissez-faire capitalism from the War on Drugs, mandatory minimum sentences for victimless 'crimes', the DMCA, the latest NDAA, the USA PATRIOT Act, Presidential Kill Lists, Sarbanes-Oxley, the taxation of US citizens who reside abroad, etc., using Ayn Rand's Objectivism. We seriously need better allies than this. ... yeah, pretty liberal interpretation of laissez-faire ... goes something like "The State can do whatever it likes as long as it is not doing it to ME." |
|
|
|
No kidding, who buys an asset expecting to lose value? ...
Most people. Cars, boats, clothes, computers, etc. You are confusing consumables with assets. Are you a tax agent?  |
|
|
|
Nelisky : what's the logic behind your patch that has the priv key prefix "2xxx" ? Is it done this way anywhere else? Why not use the "5xxx" prefix for interchangeability with bitcoin priv keys? Thanks if you can shed some light. |
|
|
|
It's a sticky one  Pros and cons either way I think. Clearly there is increased chance for confusion using same prefix as bitcoin priv key, but if we use the same then there is no need for an intermediate tool to convert formats when moving shared bit/namecoin priv keys between wallets. Looks like the prefix 2 is already reserved for testnet script hash so there is potential for confusion/conflict there. https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/List_of_address_prefixesLowercase n is already taken also ... pick a base58 character and go with it? |
|
|
|
If they want to corner Litecoins too that would be great, and VaginaCoin and then the immense number of new coins that will be produced once people realize that the banksters will buy them all.  I think they still do not fully appreciate how disruptive this could really be. This ... BitCoin is not a single company, there is no "The Bitcoin Company" running the bitcoin servers, or even a single decentralised network. It is open source for creating monies ad infinitum, i.e. armageddon for anybody still harbouring illusions of monopoly power over monetary issuance. |
|
|
|
snailbrain : I was just testing the "dumpprivkey" on namecoin-qt and it has outputted keys with leading characters 2xxx?
I was expecting wallet import format leading characters 5xxx ... something may have been missed in the translation?
does importing it not work? will test asap I didn't test importing, it may well work if the same format has been used there also ... it was that I was expecting them to be in the bitcoin WIF, leading char 5, such that the same privkey can be used interchangeably between namecoin and bitcoin wallets. That may be a task for a spearate translation tool ... it just wasn't what I was expecting. I would go for same privkey format as bitcoin if it was purely my decision. |
|
|
|
Talking through his pocket ... the guy is financial compliance consultant. Sounds like he doesn't know too much about how bitcoin works but knows he can make some money by talking about 'compliance' for bitcoin businesses. Just another unnecessary layer of parasitism. Mike Gogulski in the comments nails his ass to the wall. This is pure nonsense. Bitcoin itself is completely unaffected by the latest legal threats and actions.
What *are* affected are above-ground Bitcoin businesses taking customer deposits in national currencies and/or providing services that go under money transmitter or exchanger rules.
NOT affected are people making cash-for-Bitcoin swaps in person, people transacting business solely on the Bitcoin block chain, and people and businesses that don’t care a whit about the repressive, innovation-stifling AML/KYC laws around the world — which, dressed up in the guise of “fighting crime”, are really about total financial surveillance to ensure the maximum tax grab for the ruling class and placing crushing burdens on anyone who would dare to compete against the creaky, bloated, diseased, super-privileged, 1%-owned legacy financial system. The latter group operate both above-ground but not yet at a scale to attract the attention of the ruling class’s goon squads as well as completely below ground, be it through the use of PGP encryption and anonymization networks like Tor or I2P or just on a person-to-person or “club” type basis.
Bitcoin itself is a protocol and a shared transaction register. Saying “the end of Bitcoin” is to misunderstand the nature of the thing entirely. Guys like Juan use the "uphold the law" no matter how unfair because he profits from it. He is the worst kind because he knows better and realises the super-rich have stacked the deck over the little guy, but supports "the law" because he profits from the unfairness. I agree enthusiastically, but now what? What follows from that? What should " BTC" do? What should "we" do? Should we, for instance, ignore the noise? I'm guessing not, but what then? Will BTC forks, when and as needed, always keep "them" at bay? Should we get out of fiat as best we can, as soon as we can? (My preferred answer, but I need help thinking these things through down a few more levels). Something else? We code some more and come up with a crypto-currency that puts guys like Juan, and the overlords, all out of business. They are merely pointing out bitcoin's bugs and deficiencies in design, which we mostly already knew ... but they are catching up and it is a necessary testing phase. BitCoin is acknowledged as beta. Innovate. Evaluate. Iterate. |
|
|
|
|
snailbrain : I was just testing the "dumpprivkey" on namecoin-qt and it has outputted keys with leading characters 2xxx?
I was expecting wallet import format leading characters 5xxx ... something may have been missed in the translation?
|
|
|
|
Bummer have to pay to read that article. Glad to hear the Fed is studying risks of systems that have been in place for years... Almost like they are doing their job No it is absolutely NOT their job. Their job was simply the stability of the US dollar FRN (and secondarily the banking system) ... and at that simple task they have abjectly failed, it has lost 99% of its value since 1913. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
