š
Original date posted:2011-12-16
šļø Summary of this message: Rick Wesson suggests that hardening protocols and usability are related, and recommends looking at IETF's work and the elegance of Bitcoin protocols. He argues that aliases are not as secure as HTTPS secured URI+Bitcoin address pairs.
š Original message:On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:03:28AM -0800, Rick Wesson wrote:
>> Hardening the protocols and usability are related. Please look at some
>> of the work done in the IETF which has a long history in addressing
>> many of the issues you are considering. Review some of the elegance in
>> the bitcoin protocols. The proposals in this thread are neither clear
>> nor elegant. If you can't reach nearly the same level of
>> sophistication then I suggest you rethink your scheme.
>
> That's why you use URI + bitcoin address pairs, and use SSL communication
> authenticated using the respective bitcoin pubkey. They may spoof your DNS
> server, they can't fake having the requested corresponding private key.
You are making my point (again) regarding usability and security.
Aliases are not a https secured URI+bitcoin address.
-rick
Rick Wesson [ARCHIVE] /
npub1xzā¦2925u
2023-06-07 04:45:23
in reply to nevent1qā¦4yjv
Author Public Key
npub1xz8q68hmzur6c6uje593nscy3q4njx05h4vnxmz2wxxptx7u7casl2925uPublished at
2023-06-07 04:45:23Event JSON
{
"id": "c60fcfee5ee7c2d127ab7c856797bcedcc6c61985c506fd3eea9f3c5aa90cb57",
"pubkey": "308e0d1efb1707ac6b92cd0b19c304882b3919f4bd59336c4a718c159bdcf63b",
"created_at": 1686105923,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"247922e9146ee6b54a634fc05ad7a489892c01debcd0510d008be95a47f6db80",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"343f81cbe75b8e17e050fa2300a6cd74c705cb24a946b67adda25228ea284bd8",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2011-12-16\nšļø Summary of this message: Rick Wesson suggests that hardening protocols and usability are related, and recommends looking at IETF's work and the elegance of Bitcoin protocols. He argues that aliases are not as secure as HTTPS secured URI+Bitcoin address pairs.\nš Original message:On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 8:17 AM, Pieter Wuille \u003cpieter.wuille at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 08:03:28AM -0800, Rick Wesson wrote:\n\u003e\u003e Hardening the protocols and usability are related. Please look at some\n\u003e\u003e of the work done in the IETF which has a long history in addressing\n\u003e\u003e many of the issues you are considering. Review some of the elegance in\n\u003e\u003e the bitcoin protocols. The proposals in this thread are neither clear\n\u003e\u003e nor elegant. If you can't reach nearly the same level of\n\u003e\u003e sophistication then I suggest you rethink your scheme.\n\u003e\n\u003e That's why you use URI + bitcoin address pairs, and use SSL communication\n\u003e authenticated using the respective bitcoin pubkey. They may spoof your DNS\n\u003e server, they can't fake having the requested corresponding private key.\n\nYou are making my point (again) regarding usability and security.\nAliases are not a https secured URI+bitcoin address.\n\n-rick",
"sig": "aef8d2003f0066b803454cb9a42e8220d2744ec6b9ed02561ad2bb0917e83158ed1a62c6776441adda38cf05953cb4648ba8917dfbfe0ee4c7cab3c8411a6737"
}