Removal of "Lower-security Protocol Variants" section

[GraniteKeep]

Raised for discussion after @bitcoinhodler's pull request comment:

A protocol should be very strict in its implementation. A Glacier user should be able to declare that his/her funds are stored according to The Glacier Protocol without any ambiguity over how that's been done or the standard that's been achieved.

I propose that the "Lower-security Protocol Variants" section is either removed entirely, or is at least moved to an appendix appropriately marked as being outside the Glacier standard, similar to the "Extend Glacier security" section with the "We do not recommend considering these measures..." statement.

[bitcoinhodler]

To whom is the user making such a declaration about following The Glacier Protocol? This is for personal storage. Nobody else needs to know or care, not even signatories or heirs, whether they followed the full protocol or took security shortcuts.

I think it's useful to have lower-cost alternatives documented, since some people will surely balk at the expense of Glacier. I would prefer they use a well-considered and documented "shortcut Glacier", which (AFAICT) is still more secure than any other publicly documented Bitcoin storage system.

I'm fine with moving it to an appendix.

[GraniteKeep]

Yes, that's true.

"Declare" wasn't a wise choice of words, I meant more along the lines of having a clarity of the level of security achieved rather than an outward statement, like a declaration to one's self, although one example that has sprung to mind is that insurance companies may eventually offer cover for individuals. They'd want to know exactly how it had been stored.

"My bitcoin is secured according to The Glacier Protocol" may even become a theft-deterrent in itself! :)

Anyway, let's hope we get some more input on this one.

[mightybyte]

I also find it very useful to have the lower-cost alternatives mentioned. I would also be fine with moving it to an appendix.