Talk about the support for bypassing the pre-signed transactions

revault / practical-revault

Version 0 specifications for a Revault deployment

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International

33 stars 9 forks source link

Talk about the support for bypassing the pre-signed transactions #21

Closed darosior closed 3 years ago

darosior commented 4 years ago

I was arguing for explicitly allowing it as it's possible and we should not hide it. However, i feel like this is a significant threat without an according in-house watchtower policy as:

users will be like wtf.
it significantly increases -i believe- the success probability of a physical attack, while we strive for reducing it.

darosior commented 3 years ago

Same here, i'd like to discuss it on Monday. If you can start thinking about it @JSwambo @kloaec @edouardparis .

edouardparis commented 3 years ago

After discussion I think we agreed for: ACK support the feature, but make it clear it is not the revault way of doing things

darosior commented 3 years ago

Yeah:

PSBT flow
A new GUI tab "bypass" for the stakeholders

-------- Original Message -------- On Oct 13, 2020, 08:45, Edouard wrote:

After discussion I think we agreed for: ACK support the feature, but make it clear it is not the revault way of doing things

— You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.

JSwambo commented 3 years ago

Ack!

Users should be educated that bypass cannot be revoked, and the GUI should reinforce this message. Not having a bypass would be a regression from current custody operations capabilities (multi-sig wallets).

darosior commented 3 years ago

As it's going to be PSBT flow, no need to be spec'd here. Closing this.