{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub17ty4mumkv43w8wtt0xsz2jypck0gvw0j8xrcg6tpea25z2nh7meqf4qgyd","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2014-03-07\n📝 Original message:\u003e\n\u003e Interesting side note: They recommend messages transmitted via NFC to\n\u003e not exceed 1 KB in order for a snappy experience. This (again) questions\n\u003e usage of bulky X.509 certificates in our payment request messages.\n\u003e Bitcoin Wallet currently does not sign payment requests, so I could not\n\u003e try how it would feel.\n\n\nI think you could just put a signed PaymentRequest into an NFC tag and try\nreading it from that. It's the same underlying radio tech so the transfer\nspeeds should be similar, I'd think.\n\nCommon X.509 certs are bigger than they need to be for sure, but a lot of\nthe bulk comes from the use of RSA rather than ECC. An RSA signature alone\ncan be 256 bytes! There's nothing that states you have to use RSA for\ncertificates and ECC certs are out there (Google uses one), but I think\nthey are harder to get hold of. I guess over time SSL will migrate to\nmostly ECC (secp256r1) based certs.\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20140307/5b262a28/attachment.html\u003e"}