full image - Repost: Important Poll Regarding Nano Stealth Addresses (from Reddit.com, Important Poll Regarding Nano Stealth Addresses)
Mining:
Exchanges:
Donations:
A few months ago I announced that I'm developing Monero-like stealth addresses for Nano.More context is at the bottom, but it's not strictly necessary for the sake of the poll. So, which of these do you think is better?Type 1 - "on-chain"Pros:Does not require extra work to use: You can just put in the address, and hit send. Boom, done.Cons:More complexLess robust(Potentially) more bugsHarder to implementMore vulnerable to spam attacksCreates a little bit of traceable "dust", separate from the rest of the paymentLess privateType 2 - "off-chain"Camo B*nano-style.Pros:SimplerMore robustLess bugsEasier to implementMore privateCons:Cannot "restore from seed"Requires extra work to use: You have to manually send a message to the recipient.Type 2 might seem like the clear choice, but I think the extra step required is a pretty big tradeoff. Type 2 is basically like Camo B*nano, but (IMHO) more advanced.DetailsAfter being busy for a while, I'm back at it. I near-completely rewrote the prototype wallet in preparation for a public release, and fleshed it out into a full piece of software.As it turns out, Nano's protocol is actually pretty brutal for implementing privacy techniques... Without going into too much detail, stealth payments need to send an extra piece of data, which I'll call a "notification," alongside the main payment. Since Nano isn't built to handle stealth addresses like Monero, sending this notification is actually pretty tricky.The original plan was type 1, but I'm now thinking that might not be the best idea. The complications involved are really obnoxious for the user, honestly.Fortunately, switching out the notification mechanism isn't very hard. Also, I designed this system to be easily upgradable in the future, so new features can always be added later.Discussion and feedback would be very welcome.View Poll
Social Media Icons