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

Peter Todd pete at petertodd.org
Tue Jun 21 22:13:47 UTC 2016

On Mon, Jun 20, 2016 at 05:33:32PM +0000, Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> BIP 0070 has been a a moderate success, however, IMO:
> - protocol buffers are inappropriate since ease of use and extensibility is
> desired over the minor gains of efficiency in this protocol.  Not too late
> to support JSON messages as the standard going forward
> - problematic reliance on merchant-supplied https (X509) as the sole form
> of mechant identification.   alternate schemes (dnssec/netki), pgp and
> possibly keybase seem like good ideas.   personally, i like keybase, since
> there is no reliance on the existing domain-name system (you can sell with
> a github id, for example)
> - missing an optional client supplied identification

Note that "client supplied identification" is being pushed for AML/KYC
compliance, e.g. Netki's AML/KYC compliance product:


This is an extremely undesirable feature to be baking into standards given it's
negative impact on fungibility and privacy; we should not be adopting standards
with AML/KYC support, for much the same reasons that the W3C should not be
standardizing DRM.

https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20160621/5e89e377/attachment.sig>

More information about the bitcoin-dev mailing list