Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 02:42:23 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Would it be possible to add a "stupid proof" mode  (Read 3585 times)
xanatos
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41


View Profile
May 23, 2011, 07:50:58 PM
 #1

Would it be possible to add a "stupid proof" mode where new addresses aren't generated/used (I know of the 100 pregenerated addresses) (so for example no direct IP transfer of money, the New Address is grayed out, flashes a big warning dialog if used, and send money sends the "remaining" money back to the same address/to a "default" "already fixed and shown" address) so that users don't have to always backup? I have to admit, every time I move btc I'm quite scared I don't have a backup. (yeah, I know that these feature are to be used to anonymize your operations, but many persons don't truly need so much anonymity. Shops will use one time addresses to collect money, so the money you expend can't be connected to what you buy)
Oh... I would even add a nag window to remind to backup the wallet and a backup function on a menu (just to be more "stupid proof")
1481121743
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481121743

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481121743
Reply with quote  #2

1481121743
Report to moderator
1481121743
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481121743

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481121743
Reply with quote  #2

1481121743
Report to moderator
1481121743
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481121743

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481121743
Reply with quote  #2

1481121743
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481121743
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481121743

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481121743
Reply with quote  #2

1481121743
Report to moderator
theboos
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 87


View Profile
May 23, 2011, 08:03:00 PM
 #2

You, sir, would make an excellent UX specialist for Microsoft.
bittrader
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42



View Profile
May 23, 2011, 11:17:27 PM
 #3

I think perhaps features like this would be best left to alternative Bitcoin clients to implement. The official client should be as secure as reasonably possible.
xanatos
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41


View Profile
May 24, 2011, 06:06:48 AM
 #4

Quote
You, sir, would make an excellent UX specialist for Microsoft.
It's always difficult to recognize compliments from sarcams:-) But I'm an optimist (I always think the glass is half empty but at least it isn't totally empty) so I'll interpret it as a compliment and I'll thank you :-)

Quote
I think perhaps features like this would be best left to alternative Bitcoin clients to implement. The official client should be as secure as reasonably possible.
This wouldn't make it "less secure". It would make it "optionally less anonymous". Technically it would make it MORE secure (because you would have less chances to lose money because you don't have a newer backup). There is a sliding scale security<->anonymity. Some persons want one, some want the other. I think Joe Six-pack would prefer not to lose money if given the choice, while the Joe-Everyone-Spies-Me would prefer to be totally anonymous. And then, if it's an option in a menu, when you need a more anonymous transaction (and it probably isn't truly more anonymous, because the money can still be tracked if you don't know what you are doing) you can still reactivate the "advanced" mode.

Ah... And why isn't wallet.dat an xml? It would be easier to edit it "by hand" in this way (for example to split/merge wallets).
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!