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-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1X74OX-0007DN-CX for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:11:53 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of bitpay.com designates 74.125.82.173 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.173; envelope-from=jgarzik@bitpay.com; helo=mail-we0-f173.google.com; Received: from mail-we0-f173.google.com ([74.125.82.173]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1X74OW-0002UG-7i for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:11:53 +0000 Received: by mail-we0-f173.google.com with SMTP id q58so804884wes.4 for ; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:11:46 -0700 (PDT) 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:content-type; bh=2WJFNyLBO445gg88Va6zMbR8U/6ZlqXi4VA9s/x2YwM=; b=Dszeq6iiBFwVh16T+TSM6cmQEaMLsMjdwsHJlP84bicVdbCEWjFp42boNGHEtTL3/N 39TBHdcjB6nM3ex4tpBDZS9LgDixd0ZRQp/LBRTCGoJxER5aPU6KUUR4hKI7bvoP7aDO OxgWOHtEqzdqDyOePEiK8mdNFoBZj8QsiaqGErtNw/OW4OTWyc4qo0ZlUqxXvLE9YPiO pxv4HjHJXDPLK1BNzjJjrUrg2wmeQoeOpHi7a7wpymHmMDQa6WQ2trH51LLEITQpELLl j4g4KAl73zhzH03UYwVwPAOWS1cGwmumHc69Zjhw1mHdxETFGIdVY2qurSrSz5WnW6kl B4/g== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlw91poTKO1S3AwJ4Qt4lZRuf/hWPTYizjjfL6xUkAKnEzwxZ1EDeaKjib/bNez8I6HW5Si X-Received: by 10.181.13.44 with SMTP id ev12mr6378583wid.57.1405437105922; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:11:45 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.5.67 with HTTP; Tue, 15 Jul 2014 08:11:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201407151448.57223.luke@dashjr.org> References: <201407151448.57223.luke@dashjr.org> From: Jeff Garzik Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 11:11:25 -0400 Message-ID: To: Luke Dashjr , Mike Hearn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) 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 -0.1 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: 1X74OW-0002UG-7i Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bitcoin address TTL & key expiration? 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: Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:11:53 -0000 On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Luke Dashjr wrote: > They can already do this. It's perfectly valid for wallets/services to ignore > (and not consider as payment) transactions using an address more than once. > There might be race attacks if this is implemented in an immediate fashon > (attacker transaction gets mined first to kill a payment), but should be > pretty safe after a few blocks. Sure it's valid. However, few users will appreciate "you ignored my deposit" as a feature. Payment protocol just doesn't well the use cases of, * an on-going payment stream from, e.g. Eligius to coinbase * deposit addresses and deposit situations -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/