[ANNOUNCE] Bitmessage - P2P Messaging system based partially on Bitcoin

[Chaoskampf]

This is such an awesome piece of software. There's so many applications you could develop that integrate it. Can't wait to sink my teeth in.

Amazing isn't it ? 

Amazing is putting it lightly. This is almost as revolutionary as Bitcoin itself (maybe I'm going a little overboard?)

[1714143282]

1714143282

[1714143282]

1714143282

[crazy_rabbit]

I wonder if there would be a way to make a 'super client' of Bitmessage/Namecoin/Bitcoin all rolled into one. Maybe use Namecoin as a bridge between the two. So you could do both secure communications, and payments all in one.

Perhaps it would be interesting to build a browser plugin that pulls all these things together.

[Anon136]

This is such an awesome piece of software. There's so many applications you could develop that integrate it. Can't wait to sink my teeth in.

Amazing isn't it ?  

Amazing is putting it lightly. This is almost as revolutionary as Bitcoin itself (maybe I'm going a little overboard?)

no i dont think you are. this could be the backbone for a new internet if the government ever tried to kill switch the exiting infrastructure. it solves the problem of routing across disparate adhock networks. at first it could be used to transfer the relevant information directly, but later it could be used to allow networks to come to agreements on how to structure meshnets. this might be bigger than bitcoin.

[Chaoskampf]

This is such an awesome piece of software. There's so many applications you could develop that integrate it. Can't wait to sink my teeth in.

Amazing isn't it ?  

Amazing is putting it lightly. This is almost as revolutionary as Bitcoin itself (maybe I'm going a little overboard?)

no i dont think you are. this could be the backbone for a new internet if the government ever tried to kill switch the exiting infrastructure. it solves the problem of routing across disparate adhock networks. at first it could be used to transfer the relevant information directly, but later it could be used to allow networks to come to agreements on how to structure meshnets. this might be bigger than bitcoin.

This is exactly what I was thinking. I'm having trouble going to sleep because I can't step away from the protocol. It's so incredibly air tight, and the possibilities are truly amazing. I'm working on a project that's going to be using it extensively.

[Rassah]

this might be bigger than bitcoin.

Um, This is bitcoin. Just without the blockchain. Credit where credit is due 

[Financisto]

I'd like to suggest something:

I guess that Firstbits stuff for Bitcoin addresses that were developed months ago would be a great implementation to Bitmessage as well.

Short bits are easier to remember as an "email address".

Don't you think so?

Here goes the original BTC idea: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=16217.0

[bitpop]

After what happened with first bits, I'm not relying on something like that again.

[BitcoinAshley]

Yeah, I'm still getting the (admittedly non-important) issue where my systray icon displays a red circle and the context menu says "Not Connected" even though the client gives green circle and is connected.

And yes, although it makes sense to have all that stuff in the same file (subs, address book, white/black list, messages, etc) I wonder if corrupt messages become an issue. Someone mentioned losing the file because of a corrupt message.... also, smaller backup footprint.

I could imagine that having your saved contacts, subs, blacklist, etc in one file would make that a very tiny file compared to the messages.dat.

But then again, flash drives usually have many gigabytes so this isn't really that important I guess...

[slacker]

I made some test and it looks like the creator of the pseudo-mailing-list must be online in order messages send to this address to be received by subscribers.

Why this is needed? Why messages cannot be received if the creator of the pseudo-mailing-list is offline?

[nimda]

I made some test and it looks like the creator of the pseudo-mailing-list must be online in order messages send to this address to be received by subscribers.

Why this is needed? Why messages cannot be received if the creator of the pseudo-mailing-list is offline?

Because a pseudo-mailing-list, unlike a chan, works almost exactly like a normal mailing-list: you send a message to the server, and then the server re-broadcasts your message to everybody.

[slacker]

I made some test and it looks like the creator of the pseudo-mailing-list must be online in order messages send to this address to be received by subscribers.

Why this is needed? Why messages cannot be received if the creator of the pseudo-mailing-list is offline?

Because a pseudo-mailing-list, unlike a chan, works almost exactly like a normal mailing-list: you send a message to the server, and then the server re-broadcasts your message to everybody.

Thank you. Now I understand. I just updated my blog post about this.

[phelix]

Why not make it so one can use a Bitcoin address / keypair for messaging?

Bitcoin and Bitmessage keys will be interchangeable. Today I coded the key generation sections; Bitmessage will even save keys in Wallet Import Format.

However Bitmessage will use two keys- one for encryption and one for signing. Thus Bitcoin addresses (which are only a hash of a signing key) wouldn't be sufficient for Bitmessage. It seems to me that Bitmessage addresses could be turned into Bitcoin addresses but not the other way around.

This is gonna be cool.

Now you could store those Bitmessage/Bitcoin keys in a namecoin 'alias' namespace http://dot-bit.org/Namespace:Aliases and have the Bitmessenger client just send to a human-readable name from the namecoin blockchain ... voila ... end-to-end secure, autonomous look-up, authenticated, human-readable messaging system.

About that Bitmessage+Namecoin integration again... (many more posts further up)

Namecoin development is on overdrive right now (there are working implementations of TLS / Namecoin-QT / OpenNameId / independent local DNS proxy and lots more in NMControl / easy to install .bit plugins and server based local DNS proxy)....

Atheros and everyone else, what is your stand on this, is there still interest, how could this look like? From a Namecoin point of view a bitmessage address could simply be included in the id namespace (see http://dot-bit.org/Namespace:Identity at the very bottom) but how would the integration work on the bitmessage side?

Here there is a thread about it on the Namecoin forum: http://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1004

There might be cake a bounty, too.


About the Namecoin blockchain size issue: Hopefully there will be client with light checking like Multibit some time.

[domob]

Just to let you know (I already posted in the Bitmessage forum though, so a lot of people reading this may already have seen it anyway), I just started work on integrating namecoin identities with the bitmessage client, see https://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1004.

[gollum]

Is it overkill to use PGP for the messages sent with BitMessage? (encryption^2)

[bitpop]

I would still use pgp.. for certain messages. Bm hasn't been fully audited yet, a vulernability could exist.
Plus your keys could be stolen like a wallet.

[gollum]

I would still use pgp.. for certain messages. Bm hasn't been fully audited yet, a vulernability could exist.
Plus your keys could be stolen like a wallet.

Its motivating that Im not the only paranoid person here I believe that paranoia is an evolutionary benefit in the society we got today.

[bitpop]

I mean bm is almost pgp, million times better than email, but why not also add pgp. It's just an extra second vs in jail for years.

[marcus_of_augustus]

I mean bm is almost pgp, million times better than email, but why not also add pgp. It's just an extra second vs in jail for years.

What the hell are you involved in?

Edit: actually i don't want to know.

[gollum]

I mean bm is almost pgp, million times better than email, but why not also add pgp. It's just an extra second vs in jail for years.

What the hell are you involved in?

Edit: actually i don't want to know.

What is legal today may be illegal tommorow - So its better be safe than sorry.

[bitpop]

Yup and a lifetime in jail or Guantanamo would suck