summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/bip-0047.mediawiki
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
2015-12-18clarify the various types of child keys derived from an identityJustus Ranvier
2015-12-18add missing change notification and minor correctionsJustus Ranvier
2015-11-23fix typoMichael Goldstein
2015-10-12Improve ECDH and blinding factor calculationsJustus Ranvier
The blinding factor used for notification transactions incorporates and outpoint being spent by the notification transaction. This ensures that blinding factors will always be unique, even if a user sends a notification transaction to the same recipient multiple times while spending funds from the same address. Since some common EC libraries have ECDH functions that only return the x value of the resulting point, only use the x value for calculating scalar shared secrets.
2015-09-21BIP-47: correct base58check version byteJustus Ranvier
Previously specified version byte only produced the desired leading character if the check bytes were omitted Thanks to TD from Samourai Wallet for pointing this out
2015-09-18BIP-47: Clarify decoding of notification transactionsJustus Ranvier
Specify procedure for extracting payment codes from notification transactions. Add explicit check that payment code x values are valid for secp256k1
2015-07-10improve Bitmessage key derivationJustus Ranvier
2015-07-10add mailing list discussion referenceJustus Ranvier
2015-07-10Correct serializationJustus Ranvier
Since the length of the data encoded by base58check affects the version byte needed to produce a desired leading character, fix the length of the payment code at 80 bytes, and correct the version byte to 0x23
2015-07-10BIP-0047: Reusable payment codesJustus Ranvier
Payment codes are SPV-friendly alternatives to DarkWallet-style stealth addresses which provide useful features such as positively identifying senders to recipients and automatically providing for transaction refunds. Payment codes can be publicly advertised and associated with a real-life identity without causing a loss of financial privacy. Compared to stealth addresses, payment codes require less blockchain data storage. Payment codes require 65 bytes of OP_RETURN data per sender-recipient pair, while stealth addresses require 40 bytes per transaction.