1
0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git synced 2025-05-26 12:10:14 +00:00

Response to Eric Voskuil, 2017-01-21 and request for clarification.

Jonathan Cross 2017-02-04 20:11:53 +01:00
parent e5ab790d45
commit 935ca82e84

@ -2,4 +2,6 @@ Designed for single-key "paper wallets", which are not a good idea in general. -
I assume this is not meant as a general recommendation against "paper wallets", but rather paper wallets that consist of a single key? If so, is there an equivalent BIP (or discussion) on passphrase-protected HD paper wallets? --Jonathan Cross, 2017-01-17
The design may have been intended for paper wallets, although there is nothing inherently bad about either a paper wallet or encryption of a single key. I would agree that a "single-key" *wallet* is a bad idea from a privacy perspective, but there are other perfectly "good" scenarios for encryption of a single secret. The are however **significant** security problems with one aspect of BIP38. The issue is documented in detail [here](https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/BIP38-Security-Considerations). --Eric Voskuil, 2017-01-21
The design may have been intended for paper wallets, although there is nothing inherently bad about either a paper wallet or encryption of a single key. I would agree that a "single-key" *wallet* is a bad idea from a privacy perspective, but there are other perfectly "good" scenarios for encryption of a single secret. The are however **significant** security problems with one aspect of BIP38. The issue is documented in detail [here](https://github.com/libbitcoin/libbitcoin/wiki/BIP38-Security-Considerations). --Eric Voskuil, 2017-01-21
Thank you Eric. It seems the security issues only relate to the [Confirmation Code](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0038.mediawiki#confirmation-code) section, correct? Are there security issues with owner-created, single-use, BIP-38 encrypted key pair when create and printed on a secure platform? --Jonathan Cross, 2017-02-04