Author: Adam Ritter 2018-01-06 10:05:11
Published on: 2018-01-06T10:05:11+00:00
In a discussion thread on the Bitcoin development mailing list, a user asked why something like the BIP39 mnemonic format is not used for addresses. The user noted that it is much harder to copy random letters and numbers than simple words, which can lead to mistakes when copying addresses and private keys by hand. In contrast, the BIP39 seeds have a lower chance of errors. Another user responded by saying that while there was a lot of math involved in creating the Bech32 proposal, there was not as much user experience testing. A different user in the thread brought up the idea of P2SH^2, which involves having the address include the single SHA256 hash of the public key or script instead of RIPEMD160(SHA256(pubkey)) or SHA256(SHA256(script)). This would allow for relaying the "middle-hash" as a way to prove the final hash is in fact a hash itself, thereby proving it is not embedded data spam. However, another user pointed out that the Bech32 proposal has already been rushed to market without much public review, so adding more address diversity at this time may not be good for the ecosystem. Instead, the user suggested considering an address-next proposal with an explicit timeframe of N years out, featuring things like coded expiration times and abilities to have amounts under checksum.
Updated on: 2023-06-12T23:25:39.235367+00:00