public inbox for bitcoindev@googlegroups.com
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com>
To: Kalle Rosenbaum <kalle@rosenbaum.se>
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP for Proof of Payment
Date: Sat, 6 Jun 2015 17:13:46 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPg+sBjsjtSamZaBd-6tLLv0qjAHvEBgSbh4HBCUV2Z7hpioGQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPswA9zhB4GV=JJ28RRLFNrkVwExUv36zujmuAjwPd6rG6rvzQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2389 bytes --]

On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Kalle Rosenbaum <kalle@rosenbaum.se> wrote:

> > What do you gain by making PoPs actually valid transactions? You could
> for
> > example change the signature hashing algorithm (prepend a constant
> string,
> > or add a second hashing step) for signing, rendering the signatures in a
> PoP
> > unusable for actual transaction, while still committing to the same
> actual
> > transaction. That would also remove the need for the OP_RETURN to catch
> > fees.
>
> The idea is to simplify implementation. Existing software can be used
> as is to sign and validate PoPs. But I do agree that it would be a
> cleaner specification if we would make the PoP invalid as a
> transaction. I'm open to changes here. I do like the idea to prepend a
> constant string. But that would require changes in transaction signing
> and validation code, wouldn't it?
>

Yes, of course. An alternative is adding a 21M BTC output at the end, or
bitflipping the txin prevout hashes, or another reversible transformation
on the transaction data that is guaranteed to invalidate it.

I think that the risk of asking people to sign something that is not an
actual transaction, but could be used as one, is very scary.


> > Also, I would call it "proof of transaction intent", as it's a
> commitment to
> > a transaction and proof of its validity, but not a proof that an actual
> > transaction took place, nor a means to prevent it from being double
> spent.
>
>
> Naming is hard. I think a simpler name that explains what its main
> purpose is (prove that you paid for something) is better than a name
> that exactly tries to explain what it is.


"Proof of Payment" indeed does make me think it's something that proves you
paid. But as described, that is not what a PoP does. It proves the ability
to create a particular transaction, and committing to it. There is no
actual payment involved (plus, payment makes me think you're talking about
BIP70 payments, not simple Bitcoin transactions).


> "Proof of transaction
> intent" does not help me understand what this is about. But I would
> like to see more name suggestions. The name does not prevent people
> from using it for other purposes, ie internet over telephone network.
>

I don't understand why something like "Proof of Transaction Intent" would
be incompatible with internet over telephone network either...

-- 
Pieter

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3237 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2015-06-06 15:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-06 14:35 [Bitcoin-development] BIP for Proof of Payment Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-06 14:47 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-06-06 15:05   ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-06 15:13     ` Pieter Wuille [this message]
2015-06-06 16:20       ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-06 16:10     ` Tom Harding
2015-06-06 17:00       ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-06 21:25         ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-06 22:01           ` Luke Dashjr
2015-06-15  9:21           ` Kalle Rosenbaum
     [not found]             ` <CAPg+sBiWykR6RaHhbyYQbL=A5t1TmHgEmS_sC7jj9d3SUTMO9g@mail.gmail.com>
     [not found]               ` <CAPswA9zycU0pwZKaHU9J3Tvg=ovLJ8TZ9OH6ebTPONaRaiOE8g@mail.gmail.com>
2015-06-15 10:00                 ` Pieter Wuille
2015-06-15 11:59                   ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-16 14:31                     ` Pieter Wuille
2015-06-16 19:22                       ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-16 19:25                         ` Pieter Wuille
     [not found]                           ` <CAPswA9yFUAqFyNBFBnnwpT=B9RcdNssdjz-_KWbX5GuLM5Uyxw@mail.gmail.com>
2015-06-16 19:48                             ` Pieter Wuille
2015-06-17  9:51                               ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-21 14:39                                 ` Kalle Rosenbaum
     [not found]                                   ` <CAPswA9w8QaWV72UuGnitWWeDTr5MPKvzwrD5udmq_FQke-NGAQ@mail.gmail.com>
2015-07-24  6:55                                     ` [bitcoin-dev] " Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-07-27  8:14                                       ` Sriram Karra
     [not found]                                 ` <CABm2gDrickFojwmUi7GqAhSW5K0yTa_59VjKrY+wAXEq1MYUoA@mail.gmail.com>
2015-07-26 21:13                                   ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-07-27  9:08                                     ` Jorge Timón
2015-07-27 11:21                                       ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-16  5:26                   ` Tom Harding
2015-06-16 12:12                     ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-16 12:31                       ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-16 14:05                       ` Tom Harding
2015-06-16 16:22                         ` Kalle Rosenbaum
2015-06-06 15:18 ` Luke Dashjr
2015-06-06 15:23   ` Pieter Wuille
2015-06-06 15:32     ` Peter Todd
2015-06-06 16:35       ` Kalle Rosenbaum

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=CAPg+sBjsjtSamZaBd-6tLLv0qjAHvEBgSbh4HBCUV2Z7hpioGQ@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=pieter.wuille@gmail.com \
    --cc=bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=kalle@rosenbaum.se \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox