Profile: 59909c5a...

Replying to daa2fc67...

📅 Original date posted:2023-08-04

🗒️ Summary of this message: Silent Payment addresses, which allow for multiple payments without privacy concerns, should have an expiration date to prevent funds from being lost forever. Adding a 3-byte field to encode the expiration date is a simple solution. Wallets should have a default expiration date and attempts to pay an expired address should fail.

📝 Original message:

tl;dr: Wallets don't last forever. They are often compromised or lost. When

this happens, the addresses generated from those wallets become a form of toxic

data: funds sent to those addresses can be easily lost forever.

All Bitcoin addresses have this problem. But at least existing Bitcoin

addresses aren't supposed to be reused. Silent Payments are: the whole point is

to have a single address that you can safely pay to multiple times, without

privacy concerns. Failing to make Silent Payment addresses eventually expire in

a reasonable amount of time is thus a particularly harmful mistake.

Fixing this is easy: add a 3 byte field to silent payments addresses, encoding

the expiration date in terms of days after some epoch. 2^24 days is 45,000

years, more than enough. Indeed, 2 bytes is probably fine too: 2^16 days is 180

years. We'll be lucky if Bitcoin still exists in 180 years.

Wallets should pick a reasonable default, eg 1 year, for newly created

addresses. Attempts to pay an expired address should just fail with a simple

"address expired". Lightning invoices are a good example here: while invoices

does not require expiration from a technical point of view, they do expire for

similar UX reasons as applies to silent payments.

--

https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org

-------------- next part --------------

A non-text attachment was scrubbed...

Name: signature.asc

Type: application/pgp-signature

Size: 833 bytes

Desc: not available

URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20230804/70c37a09/attachment.sig>

📅 Original date posted:2023-08-04

🗒️ Summary of this message: Adding a field to silent payment addresses to encode expiration dates in terms of days after an epoch can fix the risk of non-expiring addresses in Bitcoin. Custom compact encoding can be used for different levels of granularity.

📝 Original message:

I agree. Non-expiring addresses are a significant risk to bitcoin users.

On 2023-08-04 (Fri) at 17:39:03 +0000, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:

> Fixing this is easy: add a 3 byte field to silent payments addresses, encoding

> the expiration date in terms of days after some epoch. 2^24 days is 45,000

> years, more than enough. Indeed, 2 bytes is probably fine too: 2^16 days is 180

> years. We'll be lucky if Bitcoin still exists in 180 years.

Instead of a fixed width nDays, consider a custom compact encoding with

the position of the first 0-bit indicating the number of extension bytes

and the encoded granularity.

bytes | prefix | usable bits | granularity | max expiration

------|------------|-------------|-------------|---------------

1 | 0b0 | 7 | year | 128 years

2 | 0b10 | 14 | week | 315 years

3 | 0b110 | 21 | day | 5700 years

4 | 0b1110 | 28 | block | 5100 years

5 | 0b11110 | 35 | ??? | ???

6 | 0b111110 | 42 | ??? | ???

7 | 0b1111110 | 49 | ??? | ???

8 | 0b11111110 | 56 | ??? | ???

For address expiration, year or week expiration will typically be

sufficiently granular, but for rare occasions more granularity can be

encoded with longer addresses. This method also degrades cleanly even if

the same address format is still in use in 100 or 300 years.

I included block-based expiration to enable SP users to match CLTVs

embedded in their scripts, e.g.

<2 years> OP_CLTV OP_VAULT_RECOVER

or

<2 years> OP_CLTV OP_CHECKSIG

Best,

--Brandon