From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1XfDwq-0008Bg-C3 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 20:16:28 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from uschroder.com ([74.142.93.202]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1XfDwo-0004z3-3v for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 20:16:28 +0000 Received: from [192.168.253.4] (cpe-74-139-170-82.swo.res.rr.com [74.139.170.82]) by uschroder.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 26C7E22952E1F; Fri, 17 Oct 2014 15:58:49 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <544174F8.1050208@AndySchroder.com> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 15:58:48 -0400 From: Andy Schroder User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 OpenPGP: id=2D44186B; url=http://andyschroder.com/static/AndySchroder.asc Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0oMXeSTHsnFW943R55Ai1m540CjDtO7oD" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1XfDwo-0004z3-3v Cc: Andreas Schildbach Subject: [Bitcoin-development] Two Proposed BIPs - Bluetooth Communication and bitcoin: URI Scheme Improvements X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 20:16:28 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --0oMXeSTHsnFW943R55Ai1m540CjDtO7oD Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------070005000406010405040606" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------070005000406010405040606 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello, I'd like to introduce two proposed BIPs. They are primarily focused on=20 implementing the payment protocol using bluetooth connections. I've been = working on automated point of sale devices and bluetooth communication=20 is critical in my mind due to the potential lack of internet access at=20 many points of sale, either due to lack of cellular internet coverage,=20 lack of payee providing wireless internet, and/or due to financial=20 constraints of the payer prohibiting them from maintaining a cellular=20 internet service plan. These BIPs are largely modeled after the current=20 functionality of Andreas Schildbach's android Bitcoin Wallet's bluetooth = capability. I've discussed the communication scheme with him in depth=20 and believe these proposals to clearly and accurately represent the=20 communication scheme. There is also an additional &h=3D parameter added to the bitcoin: URI=20 scheme which applies to both bluetooth and http payment protocol=20 requests which allows for a hash of the payment request to be included.=20 This hash was proposed by Andreas as an amendment to BIP72, but others=20 preferred not to amend BIP72 since it has already been put into place.=20 The current version of Schildbach's bitcoin wallet already supports the=20 "h parameter". I'd appreciate feedback from everyone, particularly wallet developers as = widespread bluetooth support among wallets is very important to me. I'm=20 also very new to this mailing list as well as the BIP writing process,=20 so I'd appreciate your understanding if my conventions are not standard. = I am currently using the naming conventions "TBIP", so that I can=20 propose /temporary/ BIP numbers, and cross reference between the two.=20 Obviously these will change if the BIPs are formally adopted. You can=20 find a copy of these proposed BIPs at the following links: * https://github.com/AndySchroder/bips/blob/master/tbip-0074.mediawiki * https://github.com/AndySchroder/bips/blob/master/tbip-0075.mediawiki If you are interested, you can see a demonstration of many of the=20 proposed features using Schildbach's wallet and my fuel pump in a video=20 I recently created: https://youtu.be/kkVAhA75k1Y . The main thing not=20 implemented is multiple URLs for the payment protocol, so, as a hack,=20 I'm just presenting https vi QR code and bluetooth via NFC on my fuel=20 pump for now. There are a few known issues that could be improved to this bluetooth=20 communication scheme as well as the general payment protocol and myself=20 and Andreas would like to receive feedback regarding concerns and=20 potential solutions. Some of the known issues are: * There may seem to be some inconsistency in the connection header messages between the payment request connection and the payment connection. This is largely because it is how Andreas originally implemented the communication and is hesitant to change it since there are many instances of is software already deployed that implement this scheme. * The current method uses an unauthenticated bluetooth connection for bluetooth 2.1 and newer devices (subject to man in the middle attacks, but not passive eavesdroppers), and an unsecure and unauthenticated connection for older devices. The known concerns here are that someone within 100 meters of the payer could track the bitcoin addresses used for the transaction and could possibly replace the refund address by submitting a forged payment message to the payee. Requiring bluetooth 2.1 and authenticating the connection out of band unfortunately don't seem to be as straightforward/simple of a task with most bluetooth libraries (although I'd love for someone to prove me wrong). It's possible this communication scheme could be extended to use an https "like" protocol that would not care if the underlying bluetooth connection is authenticated or encrypted. It's actually possible that http over a bluetooth socket (instead of tcp socket) could be implemented, however it is presently uncertain whether this would be too slow, too much overhead (both on the devices software and communication), or if http could easily be run over bluetooth sockets on all platforms. * There is no acknowledgement failure message possible in the payment protocol, only an acknowledgement message or lack of acknowledgement message. This issue seems to be a concern and as a result, the memo field is used to send an "ack" or "nack" in Schildbach's wallet. Can we add a boolean status field to the payment acknowledgement message?= * I'd personally like a new optional boolean field added to the "PaymentDetails" portion of the "PaymentRequest" to allow for the payer's wallet to match the "Output" optional "amount" fields as a total amount of all Outputs, rather than requiring the amount for each output to be matched exactly. As it currently is, the payee can specify multiple receiving addresses in order to require a payer split up the payments so that when the payee then goes to spend the funds later, they don't necessarily have to give their payees as much knowledge of their balances and spending and receiving habits and sources. As the payment protocol currently is requiring all output amounts to be matched exactly for each output, there is no flexibility given to the payer in order to reduce a merging or unnecessary diverging of account funds, which can reduce the privacy of both the payer and the payee. If the payee were given the option to allow the payer the option to divide the amounts amount the outputs intelligently, there can be some privacy gained. * Amount of data stored in QR codes may be getting large when a backwards compatible URL is used (for wallets that don't support the payment protocol) and can be difficult to scan with outdoor screens that have an extra weather resistant pane when in direct sunlight. * The number of offline transactions of a wallet is limited to the known unspent outputs when they go offline. Long term, I'd like to see wallet devices that can use systems such as Kryptoradio's DVB-T based broadcast (but this will need yet another radio!). Another project may be to develop a blockchain query protocol of some kind where retailers can provide access to blockchain data so that customer's wallets can update their known unspent outputs via bluetooth. It's possible such a bluetooth system could be used in combination of "Kryptoradio" like broadcasts to provide multiple blockchain references. * The additional payment_url approach is a bit sloppy of a solution in the PaymentDetails portion of the PaymentRequest. It would have been ideal to just change this from an optional field to a repeated field, however, the backwards compatibility in the protocol buffer format will provide the last item in the array for a repeated field (to a code that expects it to be an optional field), rather than the first. Because of this, backwards compatibility with https payment requests wouldn't work if the payment_url field is just changed to a repeated field. o Possible alternatives to what is described in the proposed BIP + Change payment_url to a repeated field and then reverse the order of the parameter numbers in the payment_url, compared to the bitcoin URL "r parameter". + Create an additional, new payment_url_multi repeated field (or some better name), and then leave the original payment_url field in there for backwards compatibility (and then maybe phase it out in the future). o Reference + https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/proto#upd= ating # "|optional| is compatible with |repeated|. Given serialized data of a repeated field as input, clients that expect this field to be |optional| will take the last input value if it's a primitive type field or merge all input elements if it's a message type field." Your comments and suggestions would be greatly appreciated. --=20 Andy Schroder --------------070005000406010405040606 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hello,

I'd like to introduce two proposed BIPs. They are primarily focused on implementing the payment protocol using bluetooth connections. I've been working on automated point of sale devices and bluetooth communication is critical in my mind due to the potential lack of internet access at many points of sale, either due to lack of cellular internet coverage, lack of payee providing wireless internet, and/or due to financial constraints of the payer prohibiting them from maintaining a cellular internet service plan. These BIPs are largely modeled after the current functionality of Andreas Schildbach's android Bitcoin Wallet's bluetooth capability. I've discussed the communication scheme with him in depth and believe these proposals to clearly and accurately represent the communication scheme.

There is also an additional &h=3D parameter added to the bitcoin:= URI scheme which applies to both bluetooth and http payment protocol requests which allows for a hash of the payment request to be included. This hash was proposed by Andreas as an amendment to BIP72, but others preferred not to amend BIP72 since it has already been put into place. The current version of Schildbach's bitcoin wallet already supports the "h parameter".

I'd appreciate feedback from everyone, particularly wallet developers as widespread bluetooth support among wallets is very important to me. I'm also very new to this mailing list as well as the BIP writing process, so I'd appreciate your understanding if my conventions are not standard. I am currently using the naming conventions "TBIP", so that I can propose temporary BIP numbers, and cross reference between the two. Obviously these will change if the BIPs are formally adopted. You can find a copy of these proposed BIPs at the following links:

If you are interested, you can see a demonstration of many of the proposed features using Schildbach's wallet and my fuel pump in a video I recently created: https://youtu.be/kkVAhA75k1Y<= /a> . The main thing not implemented is multiple URLs for the payment protocol, so, as a hack, I'm just presenting https vi QR code and bluetooth via NFC on my fuel pump for now.



There are a few known issues that could be improved to this bluetooth communication scheme as well as the general payment protocol and myself and Andreas would like to receive feedback regarding concerns and potential solutions. Some of the known issues are:

Your comments and suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

--=20
Andy Schroder
--------------070005000406010405040606-- --0oMXeSTHsnFW943R55Ai1m540CjDtO7oD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUQXT4AAoJEDT679stRBhrv5oIAMVA8r4ip5x3im6bUWJr3OPm t11ZPvgcwEuZ4BgG9e/LsGXexOpnDglY/ilG+YLUV9z+GcyPUoyA0lRgk+IrJhjN 9c70SSjKy75SDhUQK0brL3lmEEmbovySx6TlJ36/klVmY0l/kNPB6HrUcxPv5Aev XGLQBKONvsKh38CPC510wF6UcZZRl8kcBkO5/0vc1wHRNWn0px+dLN9pdlU7PTTd YVA++9KXd6ZtprHSTHIJSxTumPeoQ59Vg1Ra6K5O683Ggm/vUVaAK2VSlJheMhsg XIqzTJ37T8jgG9wiAOs2cFzHgq+68Jd3xQLIUhBKDkSzP1ZFGZ7sPS8FZMPAKho= =9A5S -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0oMXeSTHsnFW943R55Ai1m540CjDtO7oD--