Pages:
Author

Topic: What about bitcoin containers? - page 2. (Read 4592 times)

donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
December 30, 2011, 06:16:11 PM
#23
The Bitcoin container should contain not only the private key but also the funding transaction output. This allows the receiving client to create a transaction that sends to its own wallet without scanning the entire block chain. Scanning the block chain is a long and painful task and is not going to be less painful going forward.
The problem is that can be faked and won't be discovered until the transaction is rejected by other nodes.  Either you scan the block chain locally or you send a potentially bogus transaction into the network and wait for a rejection from the first node who validates it against the block chain.  Either way the work is being done.

There is a big difference. Because you know the funding transaction output you don't have to scan all transactions that ever occurred to see which ones match the new key. This is like telling you where in the hay stack to look.



I wouldn't imagine it saves that much time. A fraction of a second maybe?  In either case you need complete copy of block chain w/ indexes built.
Jan
legendary
Activity: 1043
Merit: 1002
December 30, 2011, 06:12:08 PM
#22
The Bitcoin container should contain not only the private key but also the funding transaction output. This allows the receiving client to create a transaction that sends to its own wallet without scanning the entire block chain. Scanning the block chain is a long and painful task and is not going to be less painful going forward.
The problem is that can be faked and won't be discovered until the transaction is rejected by other nodes.  Either you scan the block chain locally or you send a potentially bogus transaction into the network and wait for a rejection from the first node who validates it against the block chain.  Either way the work is being done.

There is a big difference. Because you know the funding transaction output you don't have to scan all transactions that ever occurred to see which ones match the new key. This is like telling you where in the hay stack to look.

donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
December 30, 2011, 06:01:52 PM
#21
The Bitcoin container should contain not only the private key but also the funding transaction output. This allows the receiving client to create a transaction that sends to its own wallet without scanning the entire block chain. Scanning the block chain is a long and painful task and is not going to be less painful going forward.

The problem is that can be faked and won't be discovered until the transaction is rejected by other nodes.  Either you scan the block chain locally or you send a potentially bogus transaction into the network and wait for a rejection from the first node who validates it against the block chain.  Either way the work is being done.

Jan
legendary
Activity: 1043
Merit: 1002
December 30, 2011, 02:56:38 PM
#20
The Bitcoin container should contain not only the private key but also the funding transaction output. This allows the receiving client to create a transaction that sends to its own wallet without scanning the entire block chain. Scanning the block chain is a long and painful task and is not going to be less painful going forward.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
December 30, 2011, 10:43:34 AM
#19
Does that already exist as a private key?  The only thing "missing" is a good/easy and user friendly import or sweep option in the client.
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1008
December 30, 2011, 10:20:57 AM
#18
Creating an incentive for people to click on files in emails or opening email attachemnts does not seem a good idea at all, it is just a way of helping phish by email and hack by email people sucker people into opening email attachments or clicking on links in emails.

The world probably needs less opening of email attachments and clicking on links in emails, not more.

-MarkM-

What about a text friendly format that can be copy and pasted?  Like:
Code:
-----BEGIN BITCOIN CONTAINER-----
Version: Bitcoin 0.51

mQGiBDXaayARBADDLdW4aij9O8HqLS/WxTYbGKUF6skz0NANFq7SSrAyF4cOj6OQ
AMo1KqrI+1KpZa7Os/AaZXrlu6vcsmVjCR/x15g0XePRDseMYw0dMqu5fE0VEbmx
UuHTOk9ocTYPr8cdT5h7aDpdTVtfQOgIngeNHtOkVohggvt3MiS0PUWwJQCg/ytm
CzTxPuockcXQi12w5R+wLGcEAKpsAEhQQT0Lm7N/LWETGbIFAYg5yPqIpm7JQV9u
7IOk/i8uzeXp2y27WTOYwrnlmdLL3eSTThd308CUxyPg46eGITv2jb1jDb2/bp9D
c1+mESXOYcyvj9havINwhx+OsEp64PlhmBlVtFGvS1XddiLhJv4VaYYqZlELqwo5
-----END BITCOIN CONTAINER-----

legendary
Activity: 2940
Merit: 1090
December 30, 2011, 10:06:26 AM
#17
Creating an incentive for people to click on files in emails or opening email attachemnts does not seem a good idea at all, it is just a way of helping phish by email and hack by email people sucker people into opening email attachments or clicking on links in emails.

The world probably needs less opening of email attachments and clicking on links in emails, not more.

-MarkM-
legendary
Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001
December 30, 2011, 04:34:19 AM
#16
Good idea, but for now I use instawallet also. I loaded btc in IW's for xmas gifts and send the url to the lucky recipient ... boom done boom!

technically, this works, of course.
But that cant be all of it.. Trusting a single company/project/website, its availability, accessability, honesty and all. Went wrong too often already. Yes, I use Instawallet too. But the future *must* be p2p-exchange, OTC-exchange, mixing cascades, and, consequently, direct import/export of single keys to transfer bitcoins "offline".
Else, we could keep using bankaccounts, papermoney and paypal, not? :-P

Ente
newbie
Activity: 45
Merit: 0
December 29, 2011, 02:17:48 PM
#15
Good idea, but for now I use instawallet also. I loaded btc in IW's for xmas gifts and send the url to the lucky recipient ... boom done boom!
hero member
Activity: 868
Merit: 1008
December 29, 2011, 12:55:05 PM
#14
I really like this idea.  It's a nice and open way to enable people to send bitcoins via email.  If you also used asymmetric encryption for the bitcoin private key, you would only need to store some protocol/address and their public key (for communications) for any given person.  You could send bitcoins via email or any of a number of other protocols (a p2p file transfer protocol would be an interesting option to add and build into wallet software…the p2p nature of the transfer would serve to conceal the sender and recipient).  The sender can also monitor whether sent coins have been claimed and even set a deadline for them to be claimed or else they're recovered back into the sender's wallet.  In terms of the bitcoin block chain, the privacy aspects are fully preserved for the recipient (the recipient's wallet can generate a brand new bitcoin address(s) to sweep the coins into or they can reuse old addresses as they see fit).

P.S. The transaction that funds the private key used in the transfer need not include any transaction fee…the recipient can choose to add a fee to the sweep transaction depending on how important and transaction is (miners would include both transactions in order to claim the fee on the sweep transaction).  Assuming a private file transfer method is used, this enables the recipient of the funds to control both the privacy and the cost of the transaction.
donator
Activity: 362
Merit: 250
December 29, 2011, 10:35:42 AM
#13
This is why a lot of people are suggesting a "sweep" function in the client for private keys (and hopefully mini-pks).

Then you could write it on a paper leave it under the door mat.  They find it, sweep it into their client/wallet and throw the paper away.  You can do this now with 3rd party tools but if you don't know what you are doing it can be risky.
hero member
Activity: 714
Merit: 500
December 29, 2011, 10:13:45 AM
#12
Another third-party method is @PayBitBack -- you send a tweet to your friend and the PayBitBack service creates an intermediary wallet the recipient later can access.
 - http://www.paybitback.com

But as far as a URI scheme to accommodate bitcoin transactions I believe that has already been described here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme
  The &send=[private key]  is the method for sending coins

I don't know if the key import capability being included in the Bitcoin.org client v0.6 will accommodate this yet though.

Interesting!
legendary
Activity: 2506
Merit: 1010
December 29, 2011, 08:52:11 AM
#11
Another third-party method is @PayBitBack -- you send a tweet to your friend and the PayBitBack service creates an intermediary wallet the recipient later can access.
 - http://www.paybitback.com

But as far as a URI scheme to accommodate bitcoin transactions I believe that has already been described here: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/URI_Scheme
  The &send=[private key]  is the method for sending coins

I don't know if the key import capability being included in the Bitcoin.org client v0.6 will accommodate this yet though.
legendary
Activity: 2126
Merit: 1001
December 29, 2011, 08:18:03 AM
#10
I like the idea of .btc files.
As said already, you can encrypt the privkey inside that file as well as add comments, checksums, returnadress or the like.

Files mailed have a better chance to remail intact too. Its too easy to have long strings corrupted in mails, like by different character-encoding or linebreak or auto-smiley-replacement or incomplete marking prior to copy and paste.

Also, a .btc file "feels" more like something substantial, has more "weight" to it, in a haptic way. I think. At least I feel a lot more comfortable having my mom handling .btc files instead of "random" strings..

Now to combine the advantages of both ideas:
Make the .btc file plaintext! Have readable, optional fields in it: "key", "comment", "checksum", "backup" etc. the only absolutely necessary field would be "key". You can open the file in a texteditor and text the key over mobilephone, or print out the whole .btc file or whatnot.

And, as always, all this depends on integration. Alternate clients, official client, exchanges, emailclients. The proposal goes in a similar direction like offlie transactions, which didnt make it into the official client yet. Encryption made it into the official client already, though.

Ente
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1016
Strength in numbers
December 28, 2011, 10:54:50 PM
#9
Couldn't you just send a private key with an amount assigned via email? QED.

Exactly.  That is the easiest method.  Create a private key, transfer funds to it.  Now you have a portable digital and physical method of transfering it.  You can print it, encrypt it, email it, put it on a thumb drive, generate a QR code on your phone etc.

This is better in the sense of not needing a trusted party. But instawallet is the stone cold nuts in convenience. Key passing will probably only get easier though and ultimately be the best way. A URI type thing where your browser can 'see' a key in an email or whatever and do a one click collect would be sick. This kind of possibility is why bitcoin wins.
Doesn't my suggestion make exactly that possible. You would one-click the file rather than a link, but that's really the only difference, and my proposal create some other possibilities as well. It's also probably easier to make your browser recognize a new file type than a new URI standard, depending on your browser.

This could also be used on sites such as MT. Gox to allow one-click-withdrawals rather than typing in an adress, simply by having them linking to a file.

Sure, it's just not 1-click yet, it totally could be. Instawallet is pretty damn simple already.
sr. member
Activity: 323
Merit: 251
December 28, 2011, 10:24:41 PM
#8
Couldn't you just send a private key with an amount assigned via email? QED.

Exactly.  That is the easiest method.  Create a private key, transfer funds to it.  Now you have a portable digital and physical method of transfering it.  You can print it, encrypt it, email it, put it on a thumb drive, generate a QR code on your phone etc.

This is better in the sense of not needing a trusted party. But instawallet is the stone cold nuts in convenience. Key passing will probably only get easier though and ultimately be the best way. A URI type thing where your browser can 'see' a key in an email or whatever and do a one click collect would be sick. This kind of possibility is why bitcoin wins.
Doesn't my suggestion make exactly that possible. You would one-click the file rather than a link, but that's really the only difference, and my proposal create some other possibilities as well. It's also probably easier to make your browser recognize a new file type than a new URI standard, depending on your browser.

This could also be used on sites such as MT. Gox to allow one-click-withdrawals rather than typing in an adress, simply by having them linking to a file.
hero member
Activity: 602
Merit: 501
December 28, 2011, 09:26:32 PM
#7
Couldn't you just send a private key with an amount assigned via email? QED.

Exactly.  That is the easiest method.  Create a private key, transfer funds to it.  Now you have a portable digital and physical method of transfering it.  You can print it, encrypt it, email it, put it on a thumb drive, generate a QR code on your phone etc.

You need to generate a new address, send the coins there, send the private key to someone and delete your copy of private key. The other person needs to import the key and immediately send the funds to a new address in order to guarantee that they are not stolen. So I would say that, above all, we need a smart client integration that allows these features.

OP suggestion is interesting because it allows for more complex operations than just sending the private key. You can add a password or a personal message for example.
sr. member
Activity: 323
Merit: 251
December 28, 2011, 09:26:03 PM
#6
Couldn't you just send a private key with an amount assigned via email? QED.
The question is wether or not the average non-technical user could. Everyone can send an e-mail. Everyone understands a file that is attached to an e-mail. Everyone understands the sentence "X Bitcoins added to your wallet" if they double-click the file. Not everyone understands public key cryptography, and they shouldn't need to either.

A standardized container with bitcoins would also provide a really intuitive way to store your bitcoins outside your wallet as I mentioned. You may only have an android client but doesn't want to keep all your bitcoins on it. Create a password-protected container, name it 100btc.btc and send it to drop box. Problem solved.
legendary
Activity: 1246
Merit: 1016
Strength in numbers
December 28, 2011, 09:17:07 PM
#5
Couldn't you just send a private key with an amount assigned via email? QED.

Exactly.  That is the easiest method.  Create a private key, transfer funds to it.  Now you have a portable digital and physical method of transfering it.  You can print it, encrypt it, email it, put it on a thumb drive, generate a QR code on your phone etc.

This is better in the sense of not needing a trusted party. But instawallet is the stone cold nuts in convenience. Key passing will probably only get easier though and ultimately be the best way. A URI type thing where your browser can 'see' a key in an email or whatever and do a one click collect would be sick. This kind of possibility is why bitcoin wins.
donator
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1079
Gerald Davis
December 28, 2011, 09:12:03 PM
#4
Couldn't you just send a private key with an amount assigned via email? QED.

Exactly.  That is the easiest method.  Create a private key, transfer funds to it.  Now you have a portable digital and physical method of transfering it.  You can print it, encrypt it, email it, put it on a thumb drive, generate a QR code on your phone etc.
Pages:
Jump to: