what I do not like about BCCAPI is that it is not really open source:
only the client is open source, the server is controlled by a single individual.
check Electrum: http://ecdsa.org/electrum/
it allows you to store your wallet with a 12-words passphrase
Very nice work on Electrum. It would be great to see something similar to Bitcoin Spinner
using it eventually. The fully-open nature is appealing as well.Slush mentioned
implementation of a 'wallet in the cloud' - I haven't looked at the code yet, but I assume the server must be present for wallet reconstruction?
There's a couple of things I don't understand.
1. Are you saying that we can create transactions with a message and that message could be an necrypted private key. Therefore we store private keys in the blockchain ?
2. If that's the case I didn't understand how we would retrieve the keys.
With Electrum, ThomasV noted the private keys are not stored in the blockchain. With the proposal, the private keys are encrypted and stored in the blockchain.
To retrieve the keys, the blockchain would need to be searched through to find associated tags, then decrypted for use. It's far more computationally intensive for the node, but doesn't rely on a dedicated Electrum server - only the Bitcoin network. A trade-off is the potential for lessened security. The two approaches mostly overlap in the functionality provided.
Hey buddy, can I borrow a Namecoin? I don't have my wallet.
It wouldn't do much good if you don't have your namecoin wallet either. That's why I like the idea of physical bitcoin for walking around money.
I like the concept of this idea. It could serve as a decentralized vault. Namecoin will have valuable uses one day.
It would probably make more sense when thinking of a contract as a URL, so information about a trust might be located at https://durangofamilytrust.bit/
. Then looking for the transactions associated with that trust could be done by searching for a hash formed from the URL. If the transactions have been appropriately tagged by the trust administration and you've used the correct hashing method on the URL, the relevant transactions will be found in the blockchain. This might be useful for third-party audit.
In this manner, as long as the Bitcoin network is functioning, the assets can be located and/or retrieved. No need for access to the Namecoin wallet - anything could be designated as the tag (the example could've been a .com instead). I just like figuring out ways of using decentralized systems in conjunction.
What problem are you trying to solve here? I don't understand the point of this proposal.
Yes, I wasn't too clear about that. It's generally an alternative to the server-based wallet-management technique used by BCCAPI and Electrum.
Using the blockchain to store encrypted private keys with their associated addresses would allow for a 'wallet in the cloud' using the Bitcoin network instead of self-hosted or managed solutions. It is also possible that thin clients could engage in limited activities without needing a dedicated server. If the tag/key pair is used and the owner is unable to update security methods (individual died?), it could be possible to recover lost coins.
Initially, I had thought using the comment field might work, but that doesn't seem feasible at present. If it were, this functionality could be implemented exclusively in a client rather than at the protocol level. Again, use of the feature would be entirely optional, though I've been interested in such a capability and keep seeing the issue brought up by others. Since the debacle of MyBitcoin, it's been difficult to garner much faith in hosted solutions.