From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1W6olq-0004b0-Ek for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 21:58:38 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of taplink.co designates 50.117.27.232 as permitted sender) client-ip=50.117.27.232; envelope-from=jeremy@taplink.co; helo=mail.taplink.co; Received: from mail.taplink.co ([50.117.27.232]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with smtp (Exim 4.76) id 1W6olp-0000fU-O2 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 21:58:38 +0000 Received: from [10.15.209.154] ([166.137.186.205]) by mail.taplink.co ; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 14:12:13 -0800 References: <20140124090218.GA15398@savin> <20140124152617.GA31017@petertodd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0) In-Reply-To: <20140124152617.GA31017@petertodd.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <9C11B575-1C43-44BB-B5C2-52F892E5A35A@taplink.co> X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (10B146) From: Jeremy Spilman Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 13:58:28 -0800 To: Peter Todd oclient: 166.137.186.205#jeremy@taplink.co#465 X-Spam-Score: -2.2 (--) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.6 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1W6olp-0000fU-O2 Cc: Bitcoin Development Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bait for reusable addresses 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, 24 Jan 2014 21:58:38 -0000 >=20 >=20 >=20 > I think we need to provide users with better options than that. >=20 Perfect privacy without extraordinary computational overhead today means dow= nloading everything. But we could provide better tools to *shift* bandwidth r= equirements rather than try to reduce them.=20 I've been thinking about a setup where user runs a UTXO only, and maybe even= outbound-connect only (like bitcoinj), full node at home. Then using Tor, m= ostly for tunneling, they host a hidden service they can connect back to fro= m their smartphone to see balances, manage receive addresses, send funds, et= c. The smartphone is not doing SPV, it's like a web client for the wallet runni= ng at home. The initial connection between the smartphone and home wallet ha= s the phone learn two codes, one is the hidden service name, another is an a= ccess token which is revocable. You may require further authentication from t= hat point.=20 With fast bootstrapping / checkpointing of the UTXO I think usability could b= e as good as SPV, and you would get push-notification of relevant transactio= ns with zero privacy trade-off. I wonder if people would want to run such an app, if they would run it on th= eir desktop, a dedicated machine, or an old smartphone or other cheap ARM de= vice.=