Luke-Jr [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2011-12-19 🗒️ Summary of this message: A developer ...
📅 Original date posted:2011-12-19
🗒️ Summary of this message: A developer suggests using HTTPS and requiring TLS/SSL for Bitcoin, while discussing the use of JSON-RPC and binary data in Bitcoin transactions.
📝 Original message:On Monday, December 19, 2011 12:04:34 PM Jordan Mack wrote:
> I still think HTTPS should be used, at the minimum. Using HTTPS is
> standard to every website out there that deals with financials, even if
> it is not a perfect system. Why should Bitcoin adopt a more lax policy
> than everyone else?
Sure, I meant HTTP as the underlying protocol.
TLS/SSL should of course be required in some form.
> I thought that JSON support was fairly common these days. I personally
> prefer XML in most cases, but since JSON is already used with the RPC,
> it seemed like a natural fit here.
JSON-RPC won't go on forever. In any case, bitcoind's use of JSON-RPC is
exactly why I (and many other developers) have come to the realization how
poorly supported JSON really is. Most of the common languages do have a
library, but almost all of them have one issue or another (particularly around
the very undefined Number type).
XML shares the same binary-data problem as JSON, too.
As slush mentioned, no additional serialization is necessary anyway.
> Binary data can be base64 encoded, although I'm not sure why you would need
> to send back binary in an alias response.
Because computers work with binary. I don't think anyone wants to implement a
fully functional script assembler just to send funds.
> What exactly do you mean by "custom output script"?
This suggests you need to learn more about how Bitcoin works ;)
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script
🗒️ Summary of this message: A developer suggests using HTTPS and requiring TLS/SSL for Bitcoin, while discussing the use of JSON-RPC and binary data in Bitcoin transactions.
📝 Original message:On Monday, December 19, 2011 12:04:34 PM Jordan Mack wrote:
> I still think HTTPS should be used, at the minimum. Using HTTPS is
> standard to every website out there that deals with financials, even if
> it is not a perfect system. Why should Bitcoin adopt a more lax policy
> than everyone else?
Sure, I meant HTTP as the underlying protocol.
TLS/SSL should of course be required in some form.
> I thought that JSON support was fairly common these days. I personally
> prefer XML in most cases, but since JSON is already used with the RPC,
> it seemed like a natural fit here.
JSON-RPC won't go on forever. In any case, bitcoind's use of JSON-RPC is
exactly why I (and many other developers) have come to the realization how
poorly supported JSON really is. Most of the common languages do have a
library, but almost all of them have one issue or another (particularly around
the very undefined Number type).
XML shares the same binary-data problem as JSON, too.
As slush mentioned, no additional serialization is necessary anyway.
> Binary data can be base64 encoded, although I'm not sure why you would need
> to send back binary in an alias response.
Because computers work with binary. I don't think anyone wants to implement a
fully functional script assembler just to send funds.
> What exactly do you mean by "custom output script"?
This suggests you need to learn more about how Bitcoin works ;)
https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Script