Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 08:35:03 AM

Quote from: Satnamakoto on November 26, 2021, 05:19:21 PM

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on November 26, 2021, 09:47:21 AM

Aside from technical problem which already mentioned by @pooya87, who's the target of this security method? I expect that,
1. Regular users don't bother with such complex setup.
2. People with serious security concern already setup their airgapped/cold wallet and don't bother switch to new protocol.
3. Exchange won't find it's useful since they regularly move big amount of Bitcoin (which means they always need "master privatekey" & "master passphrase").

regular users will have the same benefits, the limit of the amount could be reduced in the aforementioned "owner's btc book" at the time of announcing that the "subwallet address" belongs to that "master privatekey". that is, if a user owns 2 BTC, he could establish that the master private key is used if the amount to be sent is equal to or greater than "0.2 btc", therefore his risk of loss is reduced to the established limit, while his master privatekey It will remain hosted, on paper, encrypted or in a hardware wallet.

You missed my point, i'm not talking about benefit for regular user, but complexity which faced by regular user. For example,
1. Do they bother setup offline environment to create "master address"/"master privatekey"?
2. Can they remember "master passphrase", password to encrypt wallet file and different between "master"/"subwallet"?

Quote from: Satnamakoto on November 26, 2021, 05:19:21 PM

Exchanges could increase this limit in the "owner's btc book" for example to "100 btc", if the requests for signatures with the master key is reduced, then the risk of hacking will be reduced.

That makes sense if it's possible to setup the limit without using "master privatekey".

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 08:35:03 AM

You missed my point, i'm not talking about benefit for regular user, but complexity which faced by regular user. For example,
1. Do they bother setup offline environment to create "master address"/"master privatekey"?

was a bad formulation of what I wanted to say, the concept was edited, thanks to your comment.

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 08:35:03 AM

2. Can they remember "master passphrase", password to encrypt wallet file and different between "master"/"subwallet"?

"Master privatekey" will only be used to sign when required, create a subwallet, certify its ownership in the "owner's btc book" and set the output limit of the "subwallet address" (without requiring the signature of the "Master privatekey").

"subwallet address": the carrier of the funds.

"master passphrase" is a unique personal key depending on the user where you want to store it, it will only be used if you lose or destroy your "subwallet privatekey".

Destroying the "subwallet privatekey" is recommended for "HODL" (you can always recover in the future with the use of "Master privatekey" + "master passphrase", when you want to spend your funds).

Destroying the "subwallet privatekey" is not recommended if you make recurring payments because it will increase the use of your "Master privatekey" and "master passphrase" to generate the "subwallet privatekey".

Quote from: ETFbitcoin on Today at 08:35:03 AM

Quote from: Satnamakoto on November 26, 2021, 05:19:21 PM

Exchanges could increase this limit in the "owner's btc book" for example to "100 btc", if the requests for signatures with the master key is reduced, then the risk of hacking will be reduced.

makes sense if it's possible to setup the limit without using "master privatekey".

It is not possible, if this were allowed, to modify the limit of a "subwallet address" without the signature of the "master privatekey" your funds would be at risk in their entirety.

Satnamakoto

Posts

Merits