From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YJT2d-0002UF-Dz for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 20:28:47 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 74.125.82.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=74.125.82.181; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-we0-f181.google.com; Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com ([74.125.82.181]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1YJT2Z-0003xq-PI for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 20:28:47 +0000 Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id k48so9788045wev.12 for ; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:28:37 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.101.65 with SMTP id fe1mr522079wib.66.1423168117718; Thu, 05 Feb 2015 12:28:37 -0800 (PST) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.188.11 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Feb 2015 12:28:37 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2015 21:28:37 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: FgXkVcl51Zd0sxE0WyNOFw8mp-Q Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Paul Puey Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d041826be1cc4cb050e5d2623 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) 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 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 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 0.0 T_REMOTE_IMAGE Message contains an external image -0.0 AWL AWL: Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address X-Headers-End: 1YJT2Z-0003xq-PI Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal for P2P Wireless (Bluetooth LE) transfer of Payment URI 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: Thu, 05 Feb 2015 20:28:47 -0000 --f46d041826be1cc4cb050e5d2623 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 BIP70 requests can be sent over bluetooth as well, as can transactions. Bitcoin Wallet can already send money even when offline by doing this. It's transparent to the user. I mean original Bluetooth in this context - BLE has incredibly tight data constraints and isn't really meant for data transfer. Yes Android Beam has a pretty stupid UI. You can actually tap the devices, take them away and then press, but that's not obvious at all. There have been new APIs added in recent releases that give more control over this, so it's possible we can revisit things and make the UI better these days. The donation to live performer example is good - there's no issue of accidentally paying for someone else in this context as there's only one recipient, but many senders. The issue of confused payments remains in other situations though. For the coffee shop use case, it'd be nicer (I think) if we aim for a Square-style UI where the device broadcasts a (link to) a photo of the user combined with a bluetooth MAC. Then the merchant tablet can show faces of people in the shop, and can push a payment request to the users device. That device can then buzz the user, show a confirmation screen, put something on their smart watch etc or just auto-authorise the payment because the BIP70 signature is from a trusted merchant. User never even needs to touch their phone at all. On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Paul Puey wrote: > The BIP70 protocol would preclude individuals from utilizing the P2P > transfer spec. It would also require that a Sender have internet > connectivity to get the payment protocol info. BLE could enable payment w/o > internet by first transferring the URI to from Recipient to Sender. Then in > the future, we could sign a Tx and send it over BLE back to the recipient > (who would still need internet to verify the Tx). This is an important use > case for areas with poor 3G/4G connectivity as I've experience myself. > > Also, due to Android issues, NFC is incredibly clunky. The URI Sender is > required to tap the screen *while* the two phones are in contact. We > support NFC the same way Bitcoin Wallet does, but unless the payment > recipient has a custom Android device (which a merchant might) then the > usage model is worse than scanning a QR code. BLE also allows people to pay > at a distance such as for a donation to a live performer. We'll look at > adding this to the Motivation section. > > [image: logo] > *Paul Puey* CEO / Co-Founder, Airbitz Inc > +1-619-850-8624 | http://airbitz.co | San Diego > > > > > *DOWNLOAD THE AIRBITZ WALLET:* > > > > > From: Andreas Schildbach - 2015-02-05 13:47:04 > > Thanks Paul, for writing up your protocol! > > First thoughts: > > For a BIP standard, I think we should skip "bitcoin:" URIs entirely and > publish BIP70 payment requests instead. URIs mainly stick around because > of QR codes limited capacity. BIP70 would partly address the "copycat" > problem by signing payment requests. > > In your Motivation section, I miss some words about NFC. NFC already > addresses all of the usability issues mentioned and is supported by > mobile wallets since 2011. That doesn't mean your method doesn't make > sense in some situations, but I think it should be explained why to > prefer broadcasting payment requests over picking them up via near field > radio. > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website, > sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is > your > hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought > leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a > look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/ > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > --f46d041826be1cc4cb050e5d2623 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
BIP70 requests can be sent over= bluetooth as well, as can transactions. Bitcoin Wallet can already send mo= ney even when offline by doing this. It's transparent to the user. I me= an original Bluetooth in this context - BLE has incredibly tight data const= raints and isn't really meant for data transfer.

Yes Android Beam has a prett= y stupid UI. You can actually tap the devices, take them away and then pres= s, but that's not obvious at all. There have been new APIs added in rec= ent releases that give more control over this, so it's possible we can = revisit things and make the UI better these days.

The donation to live performer = example is good - there's no issue of accidentally paying for someone e= lse in this context as there's only one recipient, but many senders.

The issu= e of confused payments remains in other situations though.

For the coffee shop u= se case, it'd be nicer (I think) if we aim for a Square-style UI where = the device broadcasts a (link to) a photo of the user combined with a bluet= ooth MAC. Then the merchant tablet can show faces of people in the shop, an= d can push a payment request to the users device. That device can then buzz= the user, show a confirmation screen, put something on their smart watch e= tc or just auto-authorise the payment because the BIP70 signature is from a= trusted merchant. User never even needs to touch their phone at all.
=

On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:06 PM, Paul Puey <paul@airbitz.co<= /a>> wrote:
Th= e BIP70 protocol would preclude individuals from utilizing the P2P transfer= spec. It would also require that a Sender have internet connectivity to ge= t the payment protocol info. BLE could enable payment w/o internet by first= transferring the URI to from Recipient to Sender. Then in the future, we c= ould sign a Tx and send it over BLE back to the recipient (who would still = need internet to verify the Tx). This is an important use case for areas wi= th poor 3G/4G connectivity as I've experience myself.

Also, due to Android issues, NFC is incredibly clunky. The URI Sender is = required to tap the screen *while* the two phones are in contact. We suppor= t NFC the same way Bitcoin Wallet does, but unless the payment recipient ha= s a custom Android device (which a merchant might) then the usage model is = worse than scanning a QR code. BLE also allows people to pay at a distance = such as for a donation to a live performer. We'll look at adding this t= o the Motivation section.


From: Andreas Schildbach <andreas@sc...> - 2015-02-05 13:47:= 04
Thanks Paul, for writing up your =
protocol!

First thoughts:

For a BIP standard, I think we should skip "bitcoin:" URIs entire=
ly and
publish BIP70 payment requests instead. URIs mainly stick around because
of QR codes limited capacity. BIP70 would partly address the "copycat&=
quot;
problem by signing payment requests.

In your Motivation section, I miss some words about NFC. NFC already
addresses all of the usability issues mentioned and is supported by
mobile wallets since 2011. That doesn't mean your method doesn't ma=
ke
sense in some situations, but I think it should be explained why to
prefer broadcasting payment requests over picking them up via near field
radio.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------
Dive into the World of Parallel Programming. The Go Parallel Website,
sponsored by Intel and developed in partnership with Slashdot Media, is you= r
hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials and more. Take a<= br> look and join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
_______= ________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment


--f46d041826be1cc4cb050e5d2623--