Author: Mark van Cuijk 2014-07-28 13:06:26
Published on: 2014-07-28T13:06:26+00:00
In a discussion thread on the Bitcoin development mailing list, participants debated the best way for a payment processor (PP) to issue non-SSL certificates for merchant identification. One participant referred to another's idea, which suggested that a merchant should issue an extension certificate that allows the PP to act on their behalf. However, the original poster clarified that their proposal required two signatures over the payment request data, one with the X.509 certificate key for backward compatibility and one with the ECDSA public key. Another participant suggested that this was too complex and argued in favor of a simpler proposal that only required one signature using the former key. Overall, the discussion focused on balancing security concerns with backward compatibility.
Updated on: 2023-06-09T01:32:49.856942+00:00