08:50:54
louislibre:matrix.org:
https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/m/matrix.org/xkpoCPXMtizdmsaoCHRjVHeP.jpg (a2.jpg)
08:52:20
louislibre:matrix.org:
Some UX design like this, in the form of a checkbook, should work for any chain. User entropy from a ( 10x10 grid || amount_at_smallest_denomination || date || possible_memo ) should be above 128 bits
08:54:22
louislibre:matrix.org:
https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/m/matrix.org/ruyXRSbmzXPsGnbQDkltPtkw.jpg (a5.jpg)
08:54:48
louislibre:matrix.org:
The instructions for the XMR checkbook are all wrong of course, but this AI generated lol and should of course be adapted to Monero
09:36:37
intr:unredacted.org:
the idea is cool
13:45:49
jeffro256:
> <@louislibre:matrix.org> Thanks for the feedback jeffro256.
13:45:49
jeffro256:
Doesn't point 1 and 2 kinda defeat the point? Since you need to be online, probably using a special app, to verify a check. It also reduces security against future attacks against the issuer since the issuer can be hacked later and have the serial number changed. As for 4, I'm saying that if the issuer finds this note physical [... too long, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/p_T6i-4KMkRHWVBa ]
13:48:22
jeffro256:
If you're going for a "checkbook"-style approch, the first user can submit their portion of the pubkeys to the issuer when they order a checkbook. Then, the checks can come already funded, with some XMR amount printed in a tamper-proof manner. The user can fill in the dots after they receive them physically
13:49:35
jeffro256:
The first user can't lose their portion of the spendkey, though, otherwise they burn all their notes
21:43:20
louislibre:matrix.org:
@jeffro256: The serial number could be a hash of the public key to prevent qr tampering.
21:43:20
louislibre:matrix.org:
As for the issuer encountering the check and being able to spend it without destroying the secure element, its a true risk trade-off I hand't think before. But
21:43:20
louislibre:matrix.org:
* then the check would have no funds no more.[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/pL7Pme4KRk11RUln ]
21:44:06
louislibre:matrix.org:
@jeffro256: Interesting, need to think about this approach more. But yes I think the checkbook offers a ton of new posibilities.
22:02:42
louislibre:matrix.org:
Actually your idea is pretty neat.
22:02:42
louislibre:matrix.org:
1- First user generates keypar locally ( secrets dots and their pubkey )
22:02:42
louislibre:matrix.org:
2- First user submits pubkey to checkbook issuer
22:02:42
louislibre:matrix.org:
3- Checkbook issuer manufactures check with Final Address QR already printed[... more lines follow, see https://mrelay.p2pool.observer/e/6LaWmu4KNklyalpY ]
23:04:05
jeffro256:
True, the serial number could be a hash of the public key
23:04:54
yang:
Is this a proper processing of the Blockchain sync, because there are so many "SYNHRONIZATION started" attempts? http://pastie.org/p/2Ziq7OseyD8q7xtWhHIzWG