{"type":"rich","version":"1.0","author_name":"npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2","author_url":"https://nostr.ae/npub1m230cem2yh3mtdzkg32qhj73uytgkyg5ylxsu083n3tpjnajxx4qqa2np2","provider_name":"njump","provider_url":"https://nostr.ae","html":"📅 Original date posted:2017-09-27\n📝 Original message:Re-use of old addresses is a major problem, not only for privacy, but also\noperationally: services like exchanges frequently have problems with users\nsending funds to addresses whose private keys have been lost or stolen; there\nare multiple examples of exchanges getting hacked, with users continuing to\nlose funds well after the actual hack has occured due to continuing deposits.\nThis also makes it difficult operationally to rotate private keys. I personally\nhave even lost funds in the past due to people sending me BTC to addresses that\nI gave them long ago for different reasons, rather than asking me for fresh\none.\n\nTo help combat this problem, I suggest that we add a UI-level expiration time\nto the new BIP173 address format. Wallets would be expected to consider\naddresses as invalid as a destination for funds after the expiration time is\nreached.\n\nUnfortunately, this proposal inevitably will raise a lot of UI and terminology\nquestions. Notably, the entire notion of addresses is flawed from a user point\nof view: their experience with them should be more like \"payment codes\", with a\ncode being valid for payment for a short period of time; wallets should not be\ndisplaying addresses as actually associated with specific funds. I suspect\nwe'll see users thinking that an expired address risks the funds themselves;\nsome thought needs to be put into terminology.\n\nBeing just an expiration time, seconds-level resolution is unnecessary, and\nmay give the wrong impression. I'd suggest either:\n\n1) Hour resolution - 2^24 hours = 1914 years\n2) Month resolution - 2^16 months = 5458 years\n\nBoth options have the advantage of working well at the UI level regardless of\ntimezone: the former is sufficiently short that UI's can simply display an\n\"exact\" time (though note different leap second interpretations), while the\nlatter is long enough that rounding off to the nearest day in the local\ntimezone is fine.\n\nSupporting hour-level (or just seconds) precision has the advantage of making\nit easy for services like exchanges to use addresses with relatively short\nvalidity periods, to reduce the risks of losses after a hack. Also, using at\nleast hour-level ensures we don't have any year 2038 problems.\n\nThoughts?\n\n-- \nhttps://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org\n-------------- next part --------------\nA non-text attachment was scrubbed...\nName: signature.asc\nType: application/pgp-signature\nSize: 455 bytes\nDesc: Digital signature\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20170927/7f7c4bfb/attachment.sig\u003e"}