From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1WLZdz-0008UA-2A for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:51:31 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of m.gmane.org designates 80.91.229.3 as permitted sender) client-ip=80.91.229.3; envelope-from=gcbd-bitcoin-development@m.gmane.org; helo=plane.gmane.org; Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]) by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1WLZdx-0007rX-VR for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 14:51:31 +0000 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WLZdq-0005iI-R1 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:51:22 +0100 Received: from f052204080.adsl.alicedsl.de ([78.52.204.80]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:51:22 +0100 Received: from andreas by f052204080.adsl.alicedsl.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:51:22 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net From: Andreas Schildbach Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2014 15:51:09 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: f052204080.adsl.alicedsl.de User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -0.4 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [80.91.229.3 listed in list.dnswl.org] -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_HELO_PASS SPF: HELO matches SPF record 1.1 DKIM_ADSP_ALL No valid author signature, domain signs all mail -0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1WLZdx-0007rX-VR Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Instant / contactless payments 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, 06 Mar 2014 14:51:31 -0000 On 03/06/2014 02:44 PM, Mike Hearn wrote: > I'm not sure if iso-dep is the way to go here. Afaik as soon as you pick > up the phone the connection breaks. > > If the phone isn't willing to immediately authorise then it'd have to > fall back to HTTPS or Bluetooth as normal. Ok, that would be an option. > Besides, how do you plan to risk-analyse the memo field? > > I guess only the amount and destination are relevant for risk analysis. The memo field (and its logical evolution, an invoice) also needs to be verified, since its part of the contract. Imagine sitting in a restaurant and you're being presented the bill, most people will do a quick scan of the meals and drinks consumed (and non-malignant errors are frequent in that business). > It's already very short if you can do without Android Beam, e.g. on > Android 2.3. > > I think IsoDep based protocols must bypass Beam - when I scan my > e-passport there's no beam animation. Everything except Beam bypasses Beam (-: Beam is an Android-specific protocol. I assume it would also be possible to write an own NDEF implementation on top of the low level NFC APIs. I want to try as soon as I have a second NFC-capable phone, preferably Android 4.4. > Even the current ~10 second roundtrip is a huge improvement to the > status quo. I recently tried to buy a subway ticket and it took me 7 > full minutes (just for the payment process)! > > Then that subway kind of sucks ;) You can't really blame the subway for a broken payment process. > Have you been to London and used Oyster? Yes, it was a complete disaster. Obtaining a ticket took even longer -- ca. 45 minutes. Boarding the train took some additional seconds, compared to no overhead in Germany where we simply don't have any gates. On top of that, you walk more (in tunnels) than you get driven around, get tracked on each movement and if you want to get your (monetary) change, you need to wait for another 45 minutes. The upside is, when going by public transport in England I always feel like Mr. Freeman in City 17 (-: