Author: Alex Kotenko 2014-06-30 19:26:36
Published on: 2014-06-30T19:26:36+00:00
The context describes the implementation of Bluetooth integration offered by Andreas in bitcoin payment terminals, but there is currently no way to provide a fallback alternative URI for payment request fetch if client wallet supports BIP70 but doesn't support fetching over Bluetooth or Bluetooth connection fails for any reason. The options proposed to solve this issue are adding a new URI parameter for Bluetooth address, allowing multiple "r" parameters, or allowing "r" to be an array. Option 1 is not great as it only solves the existing problem, whereas options 2 and 3 may work, but the URI parser behavior in these cases is not clearly defined. The author seeks advice on which route to take or if there are any other solutions they might have missed. In a separate thread, vv01f suggests that companies can have a certificate with their name via CAcert, requiring some work to get assured as an organization. They ask whether the CA is to be trusted or if users need to do that. Mike Hearn responds, saying that the norm is online payments to websites, and he wonders how critical it is to have a certificate with the company's exact name. He explores the possibility of creating a super-cheesy CA just for them that issues certs with addresses and suggests checking ownership of the place on Google Maps. However, this solution wouldn't work for vending machines, but perhaps they just don't care about those.
Updated on: 2023-06-08T01:04:11.136970+00:00