On Thu, May 22, 2014 at 8:06 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgar...@bitpay.com> wrote: > Related: Current multi-sig wallet technology being rolled out now, > with 2FA and other fancy doodads, is now arguably more secure than my > PGP keyring. My PGP keyring is, to draw an analogy, a non-multisig > wallet (set of keys), with all the associated theft/data > destruction/backup risks. > > The more improvements I see in bitcoin wallets, the more antiquated my > PGP keyring appears. Zero concept of multisig. The PGP keyring > compromise process is rarely exercised. 2FA is lacking. At least > offline signing works well. Mostly.
Would be incredible to have multisig for git commits as well. I don't think git supports multiple signers for one commit at this point - amending the signature replaces the last one - but it would allow for some interesting multi-factor designs in which the damage when a dev's computer is compromised would be reduced. Sounds like a lot of work to get a good workflow there, though. My mail about single-signing commits was already longer than I expected when I started writing there. Even though the process is really simple. Though if anyone's interest is piqued by this, please pick it up. Wladimir ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Accelerate Dev Cycles with Automated Cross-Browser Testing - For FREE Instantly run your Selenium tests across 300+ browser/OS combos. Get unparalleled scalability from the best Selenium testing platform available Simple to use. Nothing to install. Get started now for free." http://p.sf.net/sfu/SauceLabs _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
