On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 3:39 AM, Michael Grønager <grona...@ceptacle.com> wrote: the customer to bypass the clerk and have 3 key addresses, or could we just leave it to the/a client to implement the multisign transaction after the money has been received - as a transfer to a safe? This would greatly simplify the problem and cover the vast majority of use cases. Not covered in this is huge single transfers where the intruder of a single key system finds it profitable to reveal their intrusion by grabbing the entire wallet.
Obviously these things don't need to be hard coupled, since they're useful independently. But I don't agree with the premise that being able to pay directly into an escrow using an address isn't essential at least as an eventual feature. The bank analogy falls down because in our threat model people are replacing the bank teller with a convincing facsimile (malware turning your computer against you). Funds can be stolen in a microsecond, so any exposure isn't good. Again, I'm not arguing to delay anything— just pointing out that the ability to have usable addresses (they can be long) that encode a couple escrow destination. Perhaps just an address type that can encode any payment script? User provides the inputs, sets the outputs plus and additional outputs, and signs. Client refuses to pay to an address if the resulting transaction fails IsStandard. On Thu, Aug 25, 2011 at 1:18 PM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandre...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2) How often will the 1-of-3 and 3-of-3 cases be used? I included them > just for completeness, but perhaps they should be dropped for now so > there is less code to write and test. I just don't imagine there are > many cases where you have exactly three parties and 1-of-3 or 3-of-3 > are required to spend. 3-of-3 in particular seems somewhat important to me (group trust accounts). I'd really rather not drop use cases unless we're not confident that they can't be tested sufficiently simply because it'll just mean another cycle of testing later someday to test them and, honestly, a more uphill argument as the usecases get narrower and narrower. I'll spend some cycles testing whatever cases make it in. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EMC VNX: the world's simplest storage, starting under $10K The only unified storage solution that offers unified management Up to 160% more powerful than alternatives and 25% more efficient. Guaranteed. http://p.sf.net/sfu/emc-vnx-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
