BitShares Forum
Main => General Discussion => Topic started by: luckybit on April 09, 2015, 02:26:25 pm
-
https://github.com/trezor/connect
Trezor connect looks good and the code is extremely clean too.
-
... clean too.
as is the code for
- trezor-emu (python)
and the hardware wallet
- trezor-emu (C)
I am 100% sure this thing can be made compatible with BTS crypto
-
https://github.com/trezor/connect
Trezor connect looks good and the code is extremely clean too.
We're way ahead :D
Already testing BTS with Trezor, lots of things already work. This fundraiser can make the integration possible within 3 months to develop it.
(http://i.imgur.com/1mdNHTm.jpg)
-
We're way ahead :D
Already testing BTS with Trezor, lots of things already work. This fundraiser can make the integration possible within 3 months to develop it.
Wait .. what?
+5% +5% +5% +5%
.. need to search for new things to do :)
-
Thats big, and trezor might start to advertise aiming at bitshares
-
as far as I know it would be theyr first non bitcoin crypto adopted.
just bitcoin, colored coins and bitshares.
and they advertise widely
-
yes cool! Are you in talk with alena @taulant? +5%
-
as far as I know it would be theyr first non bitcoin crypto adopted.
just bitcoin, colored coins and bitshares.
and they advertise widely
Actually I think there was a Litecoin implementation too.
As long as the crypto works the same everything is possible (though not with TITAN). There are very few actual problems we've encountered.
So far we've just played around with it. once 1.0 is out our plan is to start working on it more seriously.
-
Actually I think there was a Litecoin implementation too.
Which is almost identical to bitcoin ..
the trezor can basically use any satoshi blockchain wich marginal modifications
As long as the crypto works the same everything is possible (though not with TITAN). There are very few actual problems we've encountered.
So far we've just played around with it. once 1.0 is out our plan is to start working on it more seriously.
Maybe I can help with that.. I already have good knowledge about the blockchain transaction format (https://github.com/xeroc/python-bitsharestools/blob/master/bitsharestools/transactions.py)
What made me halt on developing trezor for bts is (besides of lack of time) .. the implementation of the wire format on the USB interface.
I think the best approach would be to define new protobuf messages for bitshares transactions .. but I haven't read into the trezor implementation (trezor-emu -- python) .. to much to can come up with a 'good' AND flexible solution to enable bts signing on trezor ..
But I totally agree that trezor will certainly not work nicely with TITAN .. but it would work with BIP38 and 'deterministically' derived keys in the tree .. (TITAN is not directly 'deterministic' if you don't know the 'shared secret' from the stealth address) ..
-
Actually I think there was a Litecoin implementation too.
Which is almost identical to bitcoin ..
the trezor can basically use any satoshi blockchain wich marginal modifications
As long as the crypto works the same everything is possible (though not with TITAN). There are very few actual problems we've encountered.
So far we've just played around with it. once 1.0 is out our plan is to start working on it more seriously.
Maybe I can help with that.. I already have good knowledge about the blockchain transaction format (https://github.com/xeroc/python-bitsharestools/blob/master/bitsharestools/transactions.py)
What made me halt on developing trezor for bts is (besides of lack of time) .. the implementation of the wire format on the USB interface.
I think the best approach would be to define new protobuf messages for bitshares transactions .. but I haven't read into the trezor implementation (trezor-emu -- python) .. to much to can come up with a 'good' AND flexible solution to enable bts signing on trezor ..
But I totally agree that trezor will certainly not work nicely with TITAN .. but it would work with BIP38 and 'deterministically' derived keys in the tree .. (TITAN is not directly 'deterministic' if you don't know the 'shared secret' from the stealth address) ..
The only problem we encountered which might be serious is that Trezor accounts for the Bitcoin hash formats being of variable size depending on how you built the transaction, while BTS does not do that. In a sense the exception handling happening for BTC might be an issue for BTS integration. We discovered this issue after looking into different cross-chain exchange options for Moonstone.
-
The only problem we encountered which might be serious is that Trezor accounts for the Bitcoin hash formats being of variable size depending on how you built the transaction, while BTS does not do that. In a sense the exception handling happening for BTC might be an issue for BTS integration. We discovered this issue after looking into different cross-chain exchange options for Moonstone.
It seems you have looked WAY deeper than I did .. It might be necessary to reimplement all procedures that happen after 'key' derivation .. so basically the WHOLE transaction handling ..
BTW, @cass knows some guys from TreZor .. I think he even did some design work for them (that guys is massively connected in the crypto space!!)