Way to Send Bitcoin without Internet [Theoretical Idea]

[so98nn]

The idea for Offline Bitcoin Sending / Receiving Via Short Messaging Services

The Problem:

We know very well Bitcoin can not be sent without an internet connection. While spending bitcoin from your wallet you need an internet connection via which you broadcast your transaction. This is picked up by the network/miners for further confirmation and is then included in a block forever. The entire process will use your internet connection.
From broadcasting to giving you confirmations, the wallet will keep synching with the blockchain via the internet.

It has been almost ages since we are hearing and read that this is one of Bitcoin's disadvantages as not everyone is blessed with the internet. Or even if we have it, is it possible to send it offline?

The Theory:

A possible solution is around us since the time cellular phones were invented and we got the capability of reaching out across the border via towers, satellites, and much more. This is without an internet connection obviously. In the initial days, humans knew we have broad-spectrum radio frequencies which can transfer sound waves across hundreds of miles in one go. They started building towers for specific distances to cover the range even further. As we advanced, we invented the texting system. In this one data packets with 160 characters (including all alphabets, numbers, and special characters) were possible to send and receive almost instantly.

Slowly, SMS is literally going away since we have the multimedia capability which uses the internet and we chat, call, and video over the internet via different apps.

However, the forgotten SMS could be the potential key to sending our bitcoins across the border, and that too almost instantly.

The Core Concept:

The SMS works on the principle of sending data packets over cellular networks. A packet is sent from the sender's device to the nearby cellular tower. The cellular tower then bumps the packet to SMSC which is Short Message System Center. This center then locates the nearest tower of the "receiver" and thus it transmits the packet to their device and they receive the readable message.

This does not require any sort of internet connection. Pros: If somehow the receiver is not within the reach of the cellular network then SMSC stores the packet and keeps trying to send the SMS until they get it. This means, there is a high probability of reaching the receiver's device.

How we can use this method to Send Bitcoins without the Internet?

A sharing protocol can be integrated within the wallet. Let us say I am having a wallet that isn't connected to the internet at the movement. Since I will be in possession of the private key, then I should be able to generate the offline transaction by signing it.

Since it is not connected anywhere it will be air-gapped. However, I should be able to download the desired transaction in text format so that I can send it via SMS.

The Blockchain Receiver:

This is again one of the biggest air gaps between my text containing the transaction seed and adding it to the blockchain for further confirmation.
This isn't difficult to achieve.

For example, we are flooded with OTP's these days. OTP is a one-time password generated through cell phone communication and sent to users' devices. As soon as a web-based application receives this OTP it verifies the user's data/device etc. [ Continued..]

Broadcasting and Synching the nodes:

In a similar fashion, we can have a Host/mining pool integrated with SMS receiving protocol. This will help the pool/host to keep track of any messages that are getting sent to it. Once it receives the message with valid transaction information, it should be able to download it and add it to the current block for confirmation.

Once the miner confirms the transaction it should be able to send back the information in SMS format to the receiver's device. Once the users' phone receives the SMS, their wallet should be able to read it out and synch the wallet with an updated balance. Moreover, pool/host should also send the same message to the "senders" device thus their wallet will be synched and confirmed as well.


Air-gaps:

• Between the soft wallet and blockchain
• Between the hard wallet and blockchain
• Between the sender and recipient  

All of them can be filled with the Short Messaging System without the Internet. This will take technical upgrades on various ends that is wallet, miners, pools, and devices. However, since it is going to be only soft update I believe it's achievable with the devs who have complete knowledge on both sides.


If this is already discussed, then what happened with the idea and what were the challenges other than above mentioned theory?

[1714311352]

1714311352

[1714311352]

1714311352

[1714311352]

1714311352

[1714311352]

1714311352

[1714311352]

1714311352

[1714311352]

1714311352

[examplens]

The SMS works on the principle of sending data packets over cellular networks. A packet is sent from the sender's device to the nearby cellular tower. The cellular tower then bumps the packet to SMSC which is Short Message System Center. This center then locates the nearest tower of the "receiver" and thus it transmits the packet to their device and they receive the readable message.

This does not require any sort of internet connection. Pros: If somehow the receiver is not within the reach of the cellular network then SMSC stores the packet and keeps trying to send the SMS until they get it. This means, there is a high probability of reaching the receiver's device.

SMS does not require an internet connection, but a network is required. The phone itself, without mobile operators and their infrastructure, will not send SMS. In this case, the mobile network represents what the Internet represents for the blockchain.
btw. wherever you have phone network coverage, you also have the possibility of accessing the Internet. I'm not sure why we would go back to a much more limited (plus much less secure) technology.

Here is a similar example, but even more illogical. To drive a car, to go from point A to point B (and this can be considered a form of transfer), you don't need the Internet. But you can't do without roads.

[Lucius]

As far as I know, in some African countries there have been ways to use Bitcoin without the internet for some time, although there is always a question about how safe such solutions are, given that they are always about custodial options where users do not have control over their private keys.

For those who are interested in more, I recommend the following article -> https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2023/03/15/how-africans-are-using-bitcoin-without-internet-access/

[seoincorporation]

In the past years i have read about different ways that people spend bitcoins without Internet, ways like SMS or even Radio. And people still trying to find new was for it.

Personally is have think about a way that is not the best one, at least it should work but trust is a must. I'm talking about using paper wallets as bills, let's say you make multiple paper wallets with 0.001 btc each one, if no one reden the privatekey then it works like a 0.001 btc bill.

[so98nn]

The SMS works on the principle of sending data packets over cellular networks. A packet is sent from the sender's device to the nearby cellular tower. The cellular tower then bumps the packet to SMSC which is Short Message System Center. This center then locates the nearest tower of the "receiver" and thus it transmits the packet to their device and they receive the readable message.

This does not require any sort of internet connection. Pros: If somehow the receiver is not within the reach of the cellular network then SMSC stores the packet and keeps trying to send the SMS until they get it. This means, there is a high probability of reaching the receiver's device.

SMS does not require an internet connection, but a network is required. The phone itself, without mobile operators and their infrastructure, will not send SMS. In this case, the mobile network represents what the Internet represents for the blockchain.
btw. wherever you have phone network coverage, you also have the possibility of accessing the Internet. I'm not sure why we would go back to a much more limited (plus much less secure) technology.

Here is a similar example, but even more illogical. To drive a car, to go from point A to point B (and this can be considered a form of transfer), you don't need the Internet. But you can't do without roads.

We would want to go back in time because we have an entire infrastructure spread out throughout the world for sending an SMS.

That is the whole point here. We already built the road, we do have space roads in the form of satellites. An SMS can be sent overseas without internet connection and that's the beauty of it.

The network and the internet are two entirely different things here. Consider this, you can still send an SMS with GSM.
GSM: A Global System for Mobile Communication. As far as I know, most of the countries are developed way above GSM which is mostly a 2nd generation network. This would be minimal infra or network that would be required by locality and everyone does have this.

All you need to do is set the air gap protocols at every end and send that SMS. (obviously without an internet connection).

I know this is not as easy as the above sentence but that is where the group work comes and the greatest mind sets the fire.

[Kakmakr]

I do not know if you are familiar with a payment method that existed before Bitcoin, called M-PESA .... that are very popular in African countries and that are also being done on centralized cellular networks.

I highlighted centralized, because that is the single point of failure in payment systems that runs on centralized networks. It virtually destroys Bitcoin's decentralization principle, because people have to rely on centralized cellular networks for their transactions.

We pride ourselves on the fact that Bitcoin transactions cannot be stopped, because it runs on decentralized technologies.... then we want to link it to centralized technologies for people to use it. 

[so98nn]

I do not know if you are familiar with a payment method that existed before Bitcoin, called M-PESA .... that are very popular in African countries and that are also being done on centralized cellular networks.

I highlighted centralized, because that is the single point of failure in payment systems that runs on centralized networks. It virtually destroys Bitcoin's decentralization principle, because people have to rely on centralized cellular networks for their transactions.

We pride ourselves on the fact that Bitcoin transactions cannot be stopped, because it runs on decentralized technologies.... then we want to link it to centralized technologies for people to use it. 

I did not M-PESA existed in Africa too. It was in India as well back in the time. In our case, the money used to be deducted from the balance that is left or either you could loan it out from the cellular network and send it to the other number in the form of recharge or direct deposits.

Well, centralization is one thing, but what I am saying is, it's for the good when we say we want Bitcoin to be sent offline or without any internet connection. I don't think there would be any restrictions on sending an SMS containing the hash of any transaction which in itself is encrypted and basically a garbage mixture of characters that no one can break down into output.

The safety stays reserved at one end.

On the other hand, if we start building our own towers then who would do that job? It will become centralized at some point.

Let us call it a "centralized-decentralized bridge".

[hZti]

I like this idea, because it can be integrated in hardware wallets without the fear that it will be connected to the internet. I don’t know how exactly this is going to go, but maybe it would be nice to send the current bitcoin wallet amount into the hardware wallet also, since otherwise you can never know how much bitcoin you still own without a second device.

.
btw. wherever you have phone network coverage, you also have the possibility of accessing the Internet. I'm not sure why we would go back to a much more limited (plus much less secure) technology.

This is not true in so many places on earth!

[joker_josue]

btw. wherever you have phone network coverage, you also have the possibility of accessing the Internet. I'm not sure why we would go back to a much more limited (plus much less secure) technology.

Not exactly. There are remote locations that may have low mobile network coverage, making internet access impractical.
Despite this, it may be possible to send an SMS, since the moments when the equipment connects to the network, for a few seconds, allows the sending of the SMS.

I'm not here to defend this concept, but I understand its usefulness. Because being in a place where you can send an SMS does not necessarily imply that you can also access the internet.

[examplens]

Not exactly. There are remote locations that may have low mobile network coverage, making internet access impractical.
Despite this, it may be possible to send an SMS, since the moments when the equipment connects to the network, for a few seconds, allows the sending of the SMS.

Certainly, there are exceptions, but we are talking about a real need. I am not sure what percentage of people would decide to send money via SMS "when the equipment connects to the network, for a few seconds". At the same time, you probably don't know if the transaction went well.

Low level of SMS security, I don't even want to comment.

I'm not here to defend this concept, but I understand its usefulness. Because being in a place where you can send an SMS does not necessarily imply that you can also access the internet.

As I remember, there were similar projects that provided similar possibilities, Obyte for example. But it is obvious that it is not sustainable.

[dkbit98]

There is already one  developer called Kgothatso Ngako who is very popular in South Africa for creating SMS-based service named Machankura, but that is centralized solution and SMS messages are not encrypted.
This is far from perfect but it gives people alternative to use Bitcoin with old cheap old mobile phones, there is no need for smartphones or computers.
To show you how big of a deal this is, I recently saw a video made by Coinbase exchange with this guy explaining how everything works in few minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwtHpyNmZ2c

Bitcoin paper notes is another cool idea as replacement for cash we are using today, but I am sure people would make a bunch of fake notes soon enough.
For this we don't need internet until we claim bitcoin from notes, but there would be nobody to control market of this notes and authenticity.

[joker_josue]

In fact, I wanted a way to move Bitcoin in more isolated scenarios without an internet connection, it could be an asset. But, it would be very complicated, to guarantee that all the exchanges were true.

For example, I know that VISA became famous because of its system that allowed you to use it everywhere, even in places without power. They had the form that the merchant and customer filled in, and then there was a small manual machine, where the VISA card was placed and the machine made a photocopy of the respective card form. Then the merchant only had to send the form to VISA in order to receive the money.

[Kakmakr]

I do not know if you are familiar with a payment method that existed before Bitcoin, called M-PESA .... that are very popular in African countries and that are also being done on centralized cellular networks.

I highlighted centralized, because that is the single point of failure in payment systems that runs on centralized networks. It virtually destroys Bitcoin's decentralization principle, because people have to rely on centralized cellular networks for their transactions.

We pride ourselves on the fact that Bitcoin transactions cannot be stopped, because it runs on decentralized technologies.... then we want to link it to centralized technologies for people to use it. 

I did not M-PESA existed in Africa too. It was in India as well back in the time. In our case, the money used to be deducted from the balance that is left or either you could loan it out from the cellular network and send it to the other number in the form of recharge or direct deposits.

Well, centralization is one thing, but what I am saying is, it's for the good when we say we want Bitcoin to be sent offline or without any internet connection. I don't think there would be any restrictions on sending an SMS containing the hash of any transaction which in itself is encrypted and basically a garbage mixture of characters that no one can break down into output.

The safety stays reserved at one end.

On the other hand, if we start building our own towers then who would do that job? It will become centralized at some point.

Let us call it a "centralized-decentralized bridge".

I think the problem is more about the "Man-in-the-Middle" attack opportunity, because centralized authorities abuse their powers. So they might intercept SMSs or they might block certain users that are targeted by governments and things like that.

I did not know that M-PESA was used in India, so thank you for that information.  In any way... I will also be happy if we can find a good decentralized solution to do off-line Bitcoin transactions. 

[so98nn]

@all, thanks for the healthy discussion.

Well, the cellular network is surely possible everywhere but the internet is not. They use high-frequency bands for sure. I mean you can even send the SMS over the GSM network which is 2G band and it is the lowest frequency right now and after that, you can have EDGE. Our modern phones are definitely capable of catching them everywhere they go. So it's not necessarily contradictory that the Internet and SMS are available together.

The security concern:
I am not sure why this would be a security concern if we are just sending out txid or txid hash. That's literally just a string of characters that no one can break or understand anything from the same.

If you have seen any financial app, mobile banking app, or an app that requires an extra layer of security then it would do the secure SMS verification.

Check out the image below which shows how one of the wallet apps verifies the true ownership of a device, SIM, and installed app with the SMS. As you can see there is a string of characters that the installed app generated itself and is ready to send to the server. This is how they understand and provides access to the installed app.



This authentication system is already in existence. Why would we bother about the middleman if they are just seeing some gibberish anyways?

[LoyceV]

we can have a Host/mining pool integrated with SMS receiving protocol. This will help the pool/host to keep track of any messages that are getting sent to it. Once it receives the message with valid transaction information, it should be able to download it and add it to the current block for confirmation.

You don't need a mining pool for this, just anyone will do. You can setup your own service, and broadcast the transaction online to all miners.

Once the miner confirms the transaction it should be able to send back the information in SMS format to the receiver's device.

There's a problem: you'll have to either trust the miner, or download a lot of data (like Electrum does).

In the past years i have read about different ways that people spend bitcoins without Internet, ways like SMS or even Radio. And people still trying to find new was for it.

I've read about it, but it's always "theoretical". I don't think anyone without internet is really looking to use Bitcoin. I mean: for what? Home shopping or something?

Sending Bitcoin without internet is like sending email without internet: you can use smoke signals and have your friend type it for you, but eventually it needs to find a place to connect online.

I like this idea, because it can be integrated in hardware wallets without the fear that it will be connected to the internet.

Connecting your hardware wallet to a wireless communications network is a terrible idea!

we are just sending out txid or txid hash.

Even if you have a funded paper wallet, you'll need the internet to get txid-data before you can create a transaction.

[Yamane_Keto]

Centralization is not a big problem, as dependence on one service provider can be replaced by many service providers, so that if one of them stops, you can use the other, and privacy is still preserved as the receiver is still unknown, or you can use a mixing service so that individuals cannot and without cooperation With authorities keep track of your coins.

It is rare to find a country with a single telecom service offering SMS service

The same problem is related to the Internet. You rarely find a country that has more than one ISP. if an earthquake or political disaster occurs, ISP will stop due to the failure of the service providers. The only problem is that it is not encrypted. All messages are not encrypted, so the service provider can manipulate the sending and receiving addresses.

There are little expensive solutions such as satellite internet, radio connection or any solution to deliver the transaction from your area to an area that has the internet.

[yhiaali3]

It may be possible to send the transaction using SMS but in the end you need to have internet to check your wallet and see if the balance has been sent or not.

Also, the mining pool must have a system for sending and receiving SMS so that it can receive and send transactions after confirming them. Here a problem may arise because the mining pool may be in another distant country and this needs to send external SMS and this may not be available in all countries and is expensive in sometimes.

There are some developing countries that impose restrictions on such messages. In addition, the maximum number of characters allowed in the message may be 70 characters or less, and this may not be enough to send the transaction if it contains many entries.

[so98nn]

I mean the offline sending purpose was for the regions where only GMS or EDGE is available. That's one and second when someone is entering into a zone where the internet is the issue and all they have is the support of a cellular network. (GSM or EDGE). You can't even refresh a page without having 3G or 4G these days so synching wallet would be horrible.

we can have a Host/mining pool integrated with SMS receiving protocol. This will help the pool/host to keep track of any messages that are getting sent to it. Once it receives the message with valid transaction information, it should be able to download it and add it to the current block for confirmation.

You don't need a mining pool for this, just anyone will do. You can setup your own service, and broadcast the transaction online to all miners.

Once the miner confirms the transaction it should be able to send back the information in SMS format to the receiver's device.

There's a problem: you'll have to either trust the miner, or download a lot of data (like Electrum does).

So data you mean I will have to have a copy of the blockchain somewhere and synch it with whatever data is getting fed to me over SMS? Like that?
But the idea was that, once a miner is picking up my txid for confirmation via SMS, then he will do the job of confirming it and then send it back with updated confirmation data through SMS. This SMS will be read by the wallet in offline mode and thus update the balance within the wallet.

Wouldnt that solve the entire problem?
Isn't the Air-Gap is getting filled with that SMS itself and thus no need of downloading the data? The only issue that the blockchain should know this transaction happened already is getting resolved by the miner's side. That's what I am imagining here. . .

[Jagrapolite]

Back in the day HAMcoin=hamradiocoin showed and explained how to move coins without internet at all through a ham radio it might still be up around here somewhere.

[Rupok]

Bitcoin is managed over the internet, without an internet connection bitcoins cannot be sent.  Bitcoin is used through some accesses and wallets, which cannot be operated without internet.  When you make a Bitcoin transaction from one wallet to another, you need to connect to the Internet first, because the wallets cannot be accessed without the Internet.  Then of course the internet is important for sending bitcoins.Now all platforms are internet based, so I think sending bitcoins offline is complicated.But the importance of this is that it would be better if Bitcoin could be operated offline or without any internet connection.