Author: William Swanson 2015-02-05 23:02:56
Published on: 2015-02-05T23:02:56+00:00
The context describes a discussion on the security concerns related to Bluetooth technology in Bitcoin payments. The conversation highlights that MITM (man-in-the-middle) attacks can be carried out by receiving the initial broadcast and then jamming the original signal, making it difficult to secure Bluetooth 100%. Although using a CA or other identity server could help, ad-hoc person-to-person payments would be excluded, and an active internet connection would be required to reach the CA.One alternative to securing Bluetooth is to use proximity as a substitute for identity, requiring NFC to kick-start the connection; however, at that point, QR codes might be more practical. The BIP mentioned in the context is not trying to provide bullet-proof security but instead, the best-possible security given the constraints of Bluetooth technology.Despite the security risks associated with Bluetooth, its usability is enhanced in common scenarios. The context compares the situation to lock-picking; while there are big security holes in some technologies, people still use them because going in and out is worth the risk. Bluetooth payments offer a new dimension to real-world Bitcoin usability, and it's up to us to decide whether to shut it down because it can't be made perfect or do the best we can and move forward.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T16:29:25.374985+00:00