From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EFBB09C for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:59:00 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-yw0-f178.google.com (mail-yw0-f178.google.com [209.85.161.178]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B9C0216 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:59:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yw0-f178.google.com with SMTP id i12so75149459ywa.1 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:59:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=2Y265/Jr5rP06KOD3C42gP/CFsCnduYXJTkw/Vg2Adk=; b=ZsvUwJ2Fpk9SetT87U7d1K44N4a22jmjNvuwfUm6GLu1uiuXgJPRt5kgJs/UxNHWqr fhgppuH5WXBkDp00nJruoYOiMIcohnkNoNmW1roxtnvxKCSn7Qshvm6aZ7yj6df4aVOj bRMUkn8jiIXWjal+6ZVhEtK2SsMlw/Xa+/JdAQPmNtB77AfGUxPXGIs8dl1KwNp5GCfZ UiLyVOYEUCNgsQnlQHm6xvk6Hs0XIj6/hs/p2AH6Ph+jWnEp+as2VwCw1IkxHBT0IZHT qvpgIotxbx2k9FAIMiTAMx3VDjPwFqZ0BEH5Q4V3+ez+OqjSPsqS56EOQRBbDob6veqo TXKA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=2Y265/Jr5rP06KOD3C42gP/CFsCnduYXJTkw/Vg2Adk=; b=c3MlqejBRrEcbmlLkZoO9BpXwbQuS/806mISpscrdxyOoBpMfWaU5fKqi8d1m/zeqr FDNoDS5cCU53+JF8ni/iequBAHMr+pv37GGfMUSrYbyAtrBpsYhFaLw26ygD1nBM8iMY j2b2f2Tz5dC8MP88CJDMGUxbw7PaAzHA4QIe2E04eusZ94uYfVoEvSnimQ17yX/LE/tb 38Pn0RBOw2eSF4BXvAXqhOOhyQuJpcT2q6yEMZE7pGm1EcqTjFM95rX5dOZf7ScZiPw8 /nMDFC1uERCZXMVftpgGWynS85lTeFshb2wbv5wWWwnTlxjVciLd/uNeChYQFVSpiQvM uqeA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJ1OoDF3j/5CFDGkojecFkppel+udiPZYCFLhNmKv+N1N1c4W/7PivdEBK2VY3N0DL9YPXDnZAGVuD4NA== X-Received: by 10.37.116.135 with SMTP id p129mr20205114ybc.101.1466701139478; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:58:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.13.243.133 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:58:58 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160623105632.GB19241@fedora-21-dvm> References: <20160621221347.GC10196@fedora-21-dvm> <20160623105632.GB19241@fedora-21-dvm> From: Aaron Voisine Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 09:58:58 -0700 Message-ID: To: Peter Todd , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114dd2c6690ea90535f4f845 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Even more proposed BIP extensions to BIP 0070 X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2016 16:59:01 -0000 --001a114dd2c6690ea90535f4f845 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > In any case, I'd strongly argue that we remove BIP75 from the bips > repository, > and boycott wallets that implement it. It's bad strategy for Bitcoin > developers > to willingly participate in AML/KYC, just the same way as it's bad for Tor > to > add wiretapping functionality, and W3C to support DRM tech. The minor > tactical > wins you'll get our of this aren't worth it. > > Peter, BIP75 gives the parties transacting complete control over who they choose to share their identity information with. This was the entire point of the proposal. You authorize who you choose to give your payment address to, and the sender can verify who they are sending payment to. All communication and payment info are encrypted against third party snooping, while still allowing asynchronous communication to accommodate ephemeral mobile connections. The fact that some people will choose to use this identity information for AML/KYC purposes doesn't detract at all from the fact that it gives bitcoin users the tools they need to keep their payment information private, and only communicate it with the parties they choose. Aaron Voisine co-founder and CEO breadwallet --001a114dd2c6690ea90535f4f845 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-de= v <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

In any case, I'd strongly argue that we remove BIP75 from the bips repo= sitory,
and boycott wallets that implement it. It's bad strategy for Bitcoin de= velopers
to willingly participate in AML/KYC, just the same way as it's bad for = Tor to
add wiretapping functionality, and W3C to support DRM tech. The minor tacti= cal
wins you'll get our of this aren't worth it.


Peter, BIP75 gives the parties transacting complete control over wh= o they choose to share their identity information with. This was the entire= point of the proposal. You authorize who you choose to give your payment a= ddress to, and the sender can verify who they are sending payment to. All c= ommunication and payment info are encrypted against third party snooping, w= hile still allowing asynchronous communication to accommodate ephemeral mob= ile connections.

The fact that some people will ch= oose to use this identity information for AML/KYC purposes doesn't detr= act at all from the fact that it gives bitcoin users the tools they need to= keep their payment information private, and only communicate it with the p= arties they choose.

Aaron Voisine
c= o-founder and CEO
= breadwallet
=C2=A0
--001a114dd2c6690ea90535f4f845--