UkoeHB
UkoeHB
> What would the UX differences be between B and C? As in, in what situation would it be useful for services like MyMonero to know which outputs are spent...
> If a scanning service can identify spent outputs, then your personal wallet doesn't have to do any scanning. However, this has privacy costs, since the service will learn more...
@tevador yes I think it is possible. I will add this to the table. It would cost +1 in the address size compared to other schemes.
> Is it possible to devise an addresses scheme that won't have to be changed for a long time, e.g. not even with further ring size increases like Arcturus? Requiring...
> @UkoeHB I don't know in advance. I'm following the logic that van Saberhagen didn't expect it either that it will need to be changed. Likewise, there is no way...
> I am leery of enabling 3rd party scanning, as with Janus B & C. 99% of people will allow 3rd party services to scan their entire wallets. The rest...
@r4v3r23 yes that sounds right to me. 1 -> 2 and 2 -> 3 require communication passes to and then from the offline device.
@fluffypony it is possible to do both afaict. It is just a hassle from the implementation side, the more bulky the address scheme gets.
There is currently no mitigation to the Janus attack (it's 100% undetectable), and the method proposed here is the cheapest possible mitigation in terms of blockchain bloat (it requires 1...
Since this mitigation involves adding public keys to the tx extra field, @SarangNoether says it would be best to consider it in the larger context of updating how the tx...