Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security

2017-01-05 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
Credit card transactions are simply an expample of a widely used payment system that has frequent fraud and chargebacks. The argument I'm making is that different people in different situations value speed and convenience over a known fraud risk. Instant zero confirmation transactions are extremely

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security

2017-01-04 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
It's easy enough to mark a transaction as "pending". People with bank accounts are familiar with the concept. Although the risk of accepting gossip information from multiple random peers, in the case where the sender does not control the receivers network is still minimal. Random node operators ha

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security

2017-01-03 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
lose money). I want to >>> work on it and may be able to at some point as it's somewhat related >>> to lightning. >>> >>> Also, if you're running a light client, and storing the filters the >>> way you store block headers, there's really no

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security

2017-01-03 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
. > > Also, if you're running a light client, and storing the filters the way > you store block headers, there's really no reason to go all the way back to > height 0. You can start grabbing headers at some point a while ago, before > your set of keys was generated. I thin

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Committed bloom filters for improved wallet performance and SPV security

2017-01-03 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
Unconfirmed transactions are incredibly important for real world use. Merchants for instance are willing to accept credit card payments of thousands of dollars and ship the goods despite the fact that the transaction can be reversed up to 60 days later. There is a very large cost to losing the abil

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Even more proposed BIP extensions to BIP 0070

2016-06-23 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 3:56 AM, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > In any case, I'd strongly argue that we remove BIP75 from the bips > repository, > and boycott wallets that implement it. It's bad strategy for Bitcoin > developers > to willingly partic

Re: [bitcoin-dev] RFC for BIP: Derivation scheme for P2WPKH-nested-in-P2SH based accounts

2016-06-17 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
This works for segwit version 1 with the addition of also using a different chain id. I presume that segwit version 2 will be implementing schnorr signatures. What do we know about the likely implementation details? Is there any way to avoid using a third derivation path to support it? Aaron Voi

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...

2016-05-15 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 5:08 AM, Daniel Weigl via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > > 0x4000 would be the next available to specify witness addresses. > > This is compatible with existing accounts and wallet layouts. > > my main concern here is that > -) every Bi

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...

2016-05-14 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 7:08 AM, Pavol Rusnak via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On 14/05/16 09:00, Andreas Schildbach via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > The whole idea of BIP43 (which BIP44 bases on) is that how these BIPs > > define balance retrieval never changes. This is

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...

2016-05-13 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
That's a valid concern, but I don't see the conflict here. In order to recover funds from a wallet conforming to BIPXX, you must have wallet software that handles BIPXX. Simply making BIPXX backwards compatible with previously created BIP44 or BIP43 purpose 0 wallets doesn't change this at all. A

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...

2016-05-13 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
This scheme is independent of the number of accounts. It works with BIP44 as well as BIP43 purpose 0, or any other BIP43 purpose/layout. Instead of overloading the account index to indicate the type of address, you use the chain index, which is already being used to indicate what the specific addre

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Bip44 extension for P2SH/P2WSH/...

2016-05-13 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
We use the default BIP32 wallet layout, mentioned in BIP43 as purpose "0". We were thinking of of having 4 chains below the "account" level, the original 0 and 1 for receive and change addresses, and then 0x4000 and 0x4001 for P2WPKH-in-P2SH versions of receive and change addresses. I like

Re: [bitcoin-dev] Block size: It's economics & user preparation & moral hazard

2015-12-24 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
> You present this as if the Bitcoin Core development team is in charge > of deciding the network consensus rules, and is responsible for > making changes to it in order to satisfy economic demand. If that is > the case, Bitcoin has failed, in my opinion. Pieter, what's actually happening is that

Re: [bitcoin-dev] REQ BIP # / Discuss - Sweep incoming unconfirmed transactions with a bounty.

2015-08-26 Thread Aaron Voisine via bitcoin-dev
Breadwallet also implements CPFP when spending unconfirmed non-change inputs. It was released back in May, but happy to let Andreas have the bounty: https://github.com/voisine/breadwallet/blob/v0.5.1/BreadWallet/BRWallet.m#L382 Aaron Voisine co-founder and CEO breadwallet.com On Wed, Jul 15, 20