Author: AdamISZ 2022-05-10 19:28:05
Published on: 2022-05-10T19:28:05+00:00
The author of this message is questioning the scope of a BIP that contains both a definition of address derivation and how to sign fidelity bond certificates. The author suggests that the second area, certificate signing, might be better not included and argues that it can be interpreted without consensus between wallet developers. However, if the BIP addresses the ability to move funds around, including moving funds out of an old Joinmarket wallet, by just entering its BIP39 seed, then it should be enough. The author acknowledges that there are gains to be had from discussing and agreeing on the details of creating a fidelity bond certificate but believes that it is a separate and more difficult task.The BIP draft states that almost all wallets implementing this standard can use their already-existing "Sign Message" function to sign the certificate message. Additionally, the wallet may not need to specially implement this section at all but just rely on users copypasting their certificate message into the already-existing "Sign Message" user interface. The author questions whether or not it is necessary to specify the certificate message format in the BIP, suggesting that presenting a kind of 'default' way of doing it could be worth it. However, the author also notes that it is not simple to decide what a secure, general format should be.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T20:11:46.651490+00:00