|
hivewallet (OP)
|
 |
November 19, 2013, 02:45:35 AM |
|
And why exactly do you believe certifications are the way to go here ? For this specifically I'm not taking into consideration any of the recent events, so you can scrap that from your line of thought towards me.
In the end, "certifications" are a public knowledge campaign. How that's carried out remains to be seen, but I think we're all pretty open-minded here, so if you've got a more polished idea, we're all ears. That's exactly right. Please throw out any notion that we are looking to do some kind of top-down board or anything like that. Certification is just a word. Maybe it should say "Dark Wallet Recommended Guidelines" |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"In a nutshell, the network works like a distributed
timestamp server, stamping the first transaction to spend a coin. It
takes advantage of the nature of information being easy to spread but
hard to stifle." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
Peter Todd
Legendary
 Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1150
|
|
November 19, 2013, 05:23:50 AM |
|
In the end, "certifications" are a public knowledge campaign. How that's carried out remains to be seen, but I think we're all pretty open-minded here, so if you've got a more polished idea, we're all ears.
That's exactly right. Please throw out any notion that we are looking to do some kind of top-down board or anything like that. Certification is just a word. Maybe it should say "Dark Wallet Recommended Guidelines" I think the term you're looking for is "Best Practices", perhaps "Dark Wallet Best Practices" |
|
|
|
|
Ecurb123
|
|
November 19, 2013, 07:28:44 PM |
|
please excuse my blunt ignorance on this but was one of the features going to be a built in mixer?
|
|
|
|
|
|
hivewallet (OP)
|
|
November 20, 2013, 02:18:37 AM |
|
I think the term you're looking for is "Best Practices", perhaps "Dark Wallet Best Practices"
Indeed. please excuse my blunt ignorance on this but was one of the features going to be a built in mixer?
Yes. That's CoinJoin. |
|
|
|
genjix
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1232
Merit: 1072
|
|
November 20, 2013, 08:50:15 PM |
|
I would like if we're altogether to organise an assembly for discussion of these ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Peter Todd
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1150
|
|
December 10, 2013, 12:29:33 PM |
|
I'm also working on a summary document of my take on the certification requirements, including decentralization and security issues as well as privacy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
jedunnigan
|
|
March 24, 2014, 04:16:04 PM |
|
I feel like a DarkWallet should require the full chain, although I know that's an unreasonable expectation. The actual BIP37 standard, and existing implementations of it, have a number of other flaws that reduce privacy. For instance the standard lets the seed value of the hash function be tweaked with a 32-bit integer, nTweak. However on the one hand if randomly chosen and rarely changed, as suggested by BIP37, the 32-bit integer can be used by an attacker to correlate multiple connections from the same wallet. On the other hand if nTweak is changed an attacker that can link multiple bloom filters can AND those filters together to greatly decrease the
false-positive rate and determine exactly what funds are in the user's wallet. http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel/3625 |
|
|
|
|
|
