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 03EA297A for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:14:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lf0-f53.google.com (mail-lf0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BD503527 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:14:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lf0-f53.google.com with SMTP id a2so14658403lfh.11 for ; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 05:14:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=SvNNSctPJDpJspRMIDwY1OY2pZC6c511glVFg8+Gnq8=; b=M1c0cjHeA34z7obRiYN+Ga7JoHMw9IinuN/eRO6tiVYzmPrAMkEt1/yjqlcAqVfX5M QCMl0cb/DGsOoheoyVDmnlW2uI8SrxoQ/afa/YOUz1sGrl0195HNC0bvEgVwaLL0Cnd5 bNjPATlD2hD2xP5PYyVJJ0M6QVv7YdifdaxuVPNO0ba05jZHa2NQH9sXVatRo+gGuASG SEdNU/PnRN+YPeq4wTuBi+lOKE4vVb7UsT3g6aTge4nKCTWWqo25qOvl2cqWtvV2wGwp UQoXdds/r/zqp/pgnBKlUcJF+1ftXYHPLjgD9lB7Mqozhk1bXfXtBQbj0tp4U4i//j7z IxDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=SvNNSctPJDpJspRMIDwY1OY2pZC6c511glVFg8+Gnq8=; b=TBjRv9q9gHcVfvZupOuN/ZKFHEs5Lf16EN/HLTEs452jOgH4wCG0HWKwTnSE+CWmqs 5PApT3KMHFcHV8fSSmXjjAl7v+Yfob9C+eVqNBXDf+NE+skMyyP0Fev+Il9LMmwMn2av K2jCG5z2aiiaCRSFhgr7o34YiCMThVGfTrDMFzLXeWcrlNEgid0yZo3gSRjrgHQHdgWt xolxBXVrKJq3EyONr76EmwT9xHl9ibeZJzlk70UGU8qa2kmrIizU2f7o1gxayeTWG6j4 a8P6IcA4F+Ynl+bswF9SrwGE9RU7AcxcoaglKTpvD8xxOX2iTu3W4RFr7BZrx89+RRwv YQCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaUQ8vgBny9O16JCzKqcdcFLnTqXYSws7rfbgh/uzKTuRW9Q8ALE GtDNHljt1cF+r0c7ncN4iliKL0KyqWEEuBZxBIT8Fw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+QCWhLqVDLV87LYXQ5qQAzL6i5EwiMvpJNuANw3l7t+CJqGnbBeAfxmLwrKBwidakCG9bPj+hnZYYJvZBTKz8k= X-Received: by 10.25.233.81 with SMTP id g78mr3117024lfh.197.1509365683075; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 05:14:43 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.146.25 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Oct 2017 05:14:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Ricardo Filipe Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:14:42 +0000 Message-ID: To: shiva sitamraju , Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 14:18:41 +0000 Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Visually Differentiable - Bitcoin Addresses 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: Mon, 30 Oct 2017 12:14:46 -0000 start double checking the last few bytes instead? 2017-10-30 8:56 GMT+00:00 shiva sitamraju via bitcoin-dev : > Hi, > > When I copy and paste bitcoin address, I double check the first few bytes, > to make sure I copied the correct one. This is to make sure some rogue > software is not changing the address, or I incorrectly pasted the wrong > address. > > > With Bech32 address, its seems like in this department we are taking as step > in the backward direction. With the traditional address, I could compare > first few bytes like 1Ko or 1L3. With bech32, bc1. is all I can see and > compare which is likely to be same anyway. Note that most users will only > compare the first few bytes only (since addresses themselves are very long > and will overflow in a mobile text box). > > Is there anyway to make the Bech32 addresses format more visually distinct > (atleast the first few bytes) ? > > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev >