pull down to refresh
related posts
0 new comment
170 sats \ 1 reply \ @moel 4 Nov 2022
How does this compare or differ from “PayNyms” that are so heavily shilled by the walled garden* wallet Samurai?
- walled garden in the sense that they make their own standard that only another Samurai user can make use of.
reply
0 new comment
59 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 4 Nov 2022
They cover the differences in the BIP:
reply
0 new comment
152 sats \ 1 reply \ @newnym 4 Nov 2022
Interesting. Is there any similar tech for LN?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 4 Nov 2022
It depends on what you mean.
A receiver on lightning is known to the senders, ie the senders all see the same pubkey, but unlike with base layer Bitcoin the senders don't by default know who/how much has been sent to the receiver (although, someone correct me if I'm wrong, the receiver's channel balance is public when the channel is closed).
Anyway, the fact that all senders on lightning know the same public key is not ideal for privacy. Ideally, that would be hidden too and folks are working on solutions but they require lightning protocol changes.
reply
0 new comment
152 sats \ 1 reply \ @moel 4 Nov 2022
Are there any BIP351 compatible wallets out there?
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 4 Nov 2022
There's a reference implementation: https://github.com/private-payments/rust-private-payments
reply
0 new comment
152 sats \ 1 reply \ @nerd2ninja 4 Nov 2022
The fact that its like backwards from normal (sender generates address vs receiver generating address) makes this very interesting in my mind. This is compatible with core as is or does it need merged into core?
reply
0 new comment
15 sats \ 0 replies \ @k00b OP 4 Nov 2022
From my reading it's compatible with core. Just uses OP_RETURN for notification, and the spending key is derived from that and Bob's private key.
reply
0 new comment
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @gd 4 Nov 2022
Oooh I like this. I'll definitely take a deeper dive here.
reply
0 new comment