From: Peter Vessenes <peter@coinlab•com>
To: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com>
Cc: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Signature Blocks and URI Sign Requests
Date: Tue, 3 Apr 2012 14:04:19 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMGNxUujVx0taTh+QR1WFBMKGWcxF-CvCMPwVFWirQ=XyZtquA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+s+GJCKcOky=Kfa9cNaEnpO0Lj4Va8a8N=-OZSoXLoO8aUGgQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2693 bytes --]
I don't think it's minimally invasive to layer PGP's web of trust on top of
Bitcoin, in fact, the opposite.
From a certain angle, bitcoin exists as a sort of answer / alternate
solution to the web of trust. Digital cash with an existing web of trust in
place was a working concept in the mid-1990s, courtesy of David Chaum, I
believe.
I totally agree on the kitchen sink concern; I would personally like to see
something like a one-year required discussion period on all non-security
changes proposed to the blockchain protocol. We know almost nothing about
how bitcoin will be used over the next 20 years; I believe it's a mistake
to bulk up the protocol too rapidly right now.
There's a famous phrase from the founder of Lotus about Lotus' engineering
process: "add lightness." The equivalent for protocol design might be "add
simplicity." I'd like to see us adding simplicity for now, getting a core
set of tests together for alternate implementations like libbitcoin, and
thinking hard about the dangers of cruft over a 10+ year period when it
comes to a technology which will necessarily include a complete history of
every crufty decision embodied in transaction histories.
Peter
On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 3, 2012 at 8:55 PM, Luke-Jr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, April 03, 2012 2:46:17 PM Gavin Andresen wrote:
>> > We should avoid reinventing the wheel, if we can. I think we should
>> > extend existing standards whenever possible.
>>
>> I wonder if it's possible to make sigs compatible with PGP/EC ?
>>
>
> Or we could take a step back, further into "don't reinvent the wheel"
> territory. Why not simply make use of PGP(/EC) to sign and verify messages?
> It has many advantages, like an already existing web-of-trust and keyserver
> infrastructure.
>
> I still feel like this is sign message stuff is dragging the kitchen sink
> into Bitcoin. It's fine for logging into a website, what you use it for,
> but anything that approaches signing email (such as S/MIME implementations
> and handling different character encodings) is going too far IMO.
>
> Wladimir
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Better than sec? Nothing is better than sec when it comes to
> monitoring Big Data applications. Try Boundary one-second
> resolution app monitoring today. Free.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/Boundary-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
>
>
--
Peter J. Vessenes
CEO, CoinLab
M: 206.595.9839
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3796 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-03 21:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-02 20:55 Alan Reiner
2012-04-03 0:44 ` Luke-Jr
2012-04-03 18:46 ` Gavin Andresen
2012-04-03 18:55 ` Luke-Jr
2012-04-03 19:42 ` Wladimir
2012-04-03 20:04 ` Peter Vessenes [this message]
2012-04-03 21:12 ` Alan Reiner
2012-04-03 23:37 ` Mike Koss
2012-04-04 0:01 ` Alan Reiner
2012-04-04 6:23 ` Wladimir
2012-04-04 8:35 ` Michael Grønager
2012-04-03 20:51 ` Alan Reiner
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAMGNxUujVx0taTh+QR1WFBMKGWcxF-CvCMPwVFWirQ=XyZtquA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=peter@coinlab$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
--cc=laanwj@gmail$(echo .)com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox