Tom Harding [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2015-03-24 📝 Original message:The idea of ...
📅 Original date posted:2015-03-24
📝 Original message:The idea of limited-lifetime addresses was discussed on 2014-07-15 in
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel/5837
It appears that a limited-lifetime address, such as the fanciful
address = 4HB5ld0FzFVj8ALj6mfBsbifRoD4miY36v_349366
where 349366 is the last valid block for a transaction paying this
address, could be made reuse-proof with bounded resource requirements,
if for locktime'd tx paying address, the following were enforced by
consensus:
- Expiration
Block containing tx invalid at height > 349366
- Finality
Block containing tx invalid if (349366 - locktime) > X
(X is the address validity duration in blocks)
- Uniqueness
Block containing tx invalid if a prior confirmed tx has paid address
Just an an idea, obviously not a concrete proposal.
📝 Original message:The idea of limited-lifetime addresses was discussed on 2014-07-15 in
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.bitcoin.devel/5837
It appears that a limited-lifetime address, such as the fanciful
address = 4HB5ld0FzFVj8ALj6mfBsbifRoD4miY36v_349366
where 349366 is the last valid block for a transaction paying this
address, could be made reuse-proof with bounded resource requirements,
if for locktime'd tx paying address, the following were enforced by
consensus:
- Expiration
Block containing tx invalid at height > 349366
- Finality
Block containing tx invalid if (349366 - locktime) > X
(X is the address validity duration in blocks)
- Uniqueness
Block containing tx invalid if a prior confirmed tx has paid address
Just an an idea, obviously not a concrete proposal.