On Fri, Jan 03, 2014 at 09:23:20PM +0100, Adam Back wrote:
> Seems like you (Nadav) are the third person to reinvent this idea so far :)
Lol, fourth if you include me, although my case is rather embarassing as
I had re-read Bytecoin's original post recently and completely missed
the main point of
Seems like you (Nadav) are the third person to reinvent this idea so far :)
I wrote up some of the post-Bytecoin variants here:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=317835.msg4103530#msg4103530
The general limitation so far is its not SPV compatible, so the recipient
has to test each payment
On Fri, Jan 3, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Nadav Ivgi wrote:
> I had an idea for a payment scheme that uses key derivation, but instead of
> the payee deriving the addresses, the payer would do it.
>
> It would work like that:
>
> The payee publishes his master public key
> The payer generates a random "rec
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
There is a standard mechanism for doing that called deterministic
signatures and is described in RFC 6979. It uses the private key and
the HMAC construction to generate a ECDSA k value.
On 01/03/2014 10:16 AM, Tier Nolan wrote:
> The random number tha
The random number that the buyer uses could be generated from a root key
too.
This would allow them to regenerate all random numbers that they used and
recreate their receipts. The master root would have to be stored on your
computer though.
The payment protocol is supposed to do something like
I had an idea for a payment scheme that uses key derivation, but instead of
the payee deriving the addresses, the payer would do it.
It would work like that:
1. The payee publishes his master public key
2. The payer generates a random "receipt number" (say, 25 random bytes)
3. The payer
6 matches
Mail list logo