Luke-Jr [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2011-12-13 🗒️ Summary of this message: Experts suggest ...
📅 Original date posted:2011-12-13
🗒️ Summary of this message: Experts suggest that paying to a domain name should be done through HTTPS queries to avoid security risks, and a fixed address can be used for payments.
📝 Original message:On Tuesday, December 13, 2011 8:06:15 AM Gavin Andresen wrote:
> I agree with Mike Hearn and Christian Decker-- paying to
> 'somebody at foo.com' should become, behind the scenes, a HTTPS query to
> https://foo.com/something. If you just want to (say) donate to
> eff.org, then paying to '@eff.org' aught to work nicely.
Seems like introducing a gaping security risk to me.
> It seems to me that if it was DNS-based, the address should be
> something like 'somebody.bitcoin.foo.com'. But I think it is unlikely
> people will setup and run a custom DNS server just to support bitcoin
> payments.
Could always use a fixed address and email somebody at foo.com a signed message.
🗒️ Summary of this message: Experts suggest that paying to a domain name should be done through HTTPS queries to avoid security risks, and a fixed address can be used for payments.
📝 Original message:On Tuesday, December 13, 2011 8:06:15 AM Gavin Andresen wrote:
> I agree with Mike Hearn and Christian Decker-- paying to
> 'somebody at foo.com' should become, behind the scenes, a HTTPS query to
> https://foo.com/something. If you just want to (say) donate to
> eff.org, then paying to '@eff.org' aught to work nicely.
Seems like introducing a gaping security risk to me.
> It seems to me that if it was DNS-based, the address should be
> something like 'somebody.bitcoin.foo.com'. But I think it is unlikely
> people will setup and run a custom DNS server just to support bitcoin
> payments.
Could always use a fixed address and email somebody at foo.com a signed message.