From: "Dana L. Coe" <dana.coe@bitlox•com>
To: Jonas Schnelli <dev@jonasschnelli•ch>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Hardware Wallet Standard
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 18:13:29 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <D41B40FA-0C75-496D-937A-0DF733FB87E2@bitlox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <57B4113E.4010502@jonasschnelli.ch>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1609 bytes --]
> On Aug 17, 2016, at 15:24, Jonas Schnelli via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> URI scheme instead of stdio/pipe
> --------------------------------
> The URI scheme is not ugly. Its a modern way – implemented in almost all
> platforms – how applications can interact with each other while not
> directly knowing each other. Registering a URI scheme like "bitcoin://"
> has some concrete advantages over just piping through stdio.
>
> Also, the stdio/piping approach does not work for mobile platforms
> (where the URI scheme works).
>
> The URI scheme does not require any sorts of wallet app level
> configuration (where the stdio/pipe approach would require to configure
> some details about the used hardware wallet).
Hi everybody, just thought I’d throw my opinion in here.
The URI scheme is a nice idea, but this ignores the fact that hardware wallet vendors do most of the work on talking between the computer/mobile and the wallet on a lower level of communication. In the case of BitLox, the base protocol is Google’s ProtoBuf. The commands and transaction data is in a “schema” which is then encoded in different methods accessible via ProtoBuf (depending on the data being sent). The advantages of this protocol is that it can be implemented on a wide variety of platforms. (but that’s a whole 'nother discussion)
The URI would be handled waaaaay up in the specific application (such as the mytrezor wallet software or the various standalone wallets) - nowhere near the actual hardware communications layer.
Best regards,
Dana
BitLox
[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 841 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-17 10:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-16 14:10 Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-16 14:48 ` Pavol Rusnak
2016-08-16 15:13 ` Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-16 15:21 ` Pavol Rusnak
2016-08-16 17:48 ` Jochen Hoenicke
2016-08-17 0:25 ` Thomas Kerin
2016-08-17 7:24 ` Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-17 7:40 ` Nicolas Bacca
2016-08-17 10:13 ` Dana L. Coe [this message]
2016-08-17 11:34 ` Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-17 17:06 ` Marek Palatinus
2016-08-18 6:54 ` Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-18 9:15 ` Marek Palatinus
2016-08-18 9:35 ` Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-18 9:43 ` Marek Palatinus
2016-08-18 9:49 ` Jonas Schnelli
2016-08-18 10:23 ` Nicolas Bacca
2016-08-24 10:31 ` Thomas Kerin
2016-08-16 19:22 ` Luke Dashjr
2016-08-17 0:03 ` Thomas Daede
2016-08-16 23:36 ` Aiqin Li
2016-08-17 0:14 ` Peter Todd
2016-08-17 7:27 ` Nicolas Bacca
2016-08-17 18:36 ` Bryan Bishop
2016-08-22 16:50 ` Moral Agent
2016-08-28 23:14 ` Corey Haddad
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=D41B40FA-0C75-496D-937A-0DF733FB87E2@bitlox.com \
--to=dana.coe@bitlox$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dev@jonasschnelli$(echo .)ch \
/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