Warning message when running wallet in Windows XP (or drop support?)
25 messages, 16 to 18 Apr 2014. Started by Wladimir J. van der Laan.
Wladimir J. van der Laan (5), Kevin (4), Mark Friedenbach (4), Adam Back (2), Pieter Wuille (2), Chris Williams (2), Melvin Carvalho, Roy Badami, +4 more
Hello,
Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet banking with Windows XP.
If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as they have no keys to protect). Any opinions on what to do here? Just warn and allow the user to continue? Redirect them to a 'Windows XP is dangerous' message on bitcoin.org? (Microsoft uses http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help)
The drawback of dropping XP support completely would be that a lot of computers (especially in China and Russia etc) are still running XP, so this could cause the network to lose nodes.
If you're maintainer of other wallet software: how are you handling this? Are you going to drop XP support completely? If so, starting from when?
Regards, Wladimir
On 16 April 2014 10:14, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (17 lines)
> Hello, > > Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet > banking with Windows XP. > > If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not > secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as they > have no keys to protect). > Any opinions on what to do here? Just warn and allow the user to continue? > Redirect them to a 'Windows XP is dangerous' message on bitcoin.org? > (Microsoft uses > http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help) > > The drawback of dropping XP support completely would be that a lot of > computers (especially in China and Russia etc) are still running XP, so > this could cause the network to lose nodes. >
XP with a trezor would work fine tho?
My personal preference would be a warning, and to direct them to a free software operating system that they could upgrade to.
Quoted text (21 lines)
> > If you're maintainer of other wallet software: how are you handling this? > Are you going to drop XP support completely? If so, starting from when? > > Regards, > Wladimir > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > >
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail•com>wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> XP with a trezor would work fine tho? >
Probably - but that's a very rare edge case. People that are security conscious enough to buy a Trezor will not run XP. Also I don't dare to say that there is not some way to sociaal-engineer the user with malware on a compromised OS even with a trezor.
Maybe: for 0.9.2 add a warning message and push people to upgrade (either to Win8.1 or something else), then in the next major release 0.10.0 drop XP support completely.
Wladimir
Big picture/mid-term I think air-gaps and zero-trust ecosystem components are the only solution. (zero-trust meaning like real-time auditability, or type 2/type 3 exchanges based on atomic-swap, trustless escrow etc).
Need a mass-production and air-drop of trezors :)
There is one more problem address-substitution via untrusted network/user and weak site with 1mil lines of swiss-cheese security app-store. So some kind of address authentication TOFU. Aside from X509 bloatware which could be extended from payment protocol to do that, I'd argue for a native simple TOFU format like Alan Reiner's multiplier * base approach (where base is the TOFU handle). And/or something like the IBE address proposal (which gives a bandwidth efficiently SPV queryable way to check if funds received). Worst case if weil-pairing gets broken it auto-devolves to the current status quo.
Btw not to reignite the stealth vs reusable address bike shedding, but contrarily I was thinking it maybe actually better to try to rebrand address as "invoice number". People understand double paying an invoice is not a good idea. And if they receive the same invoice twice they'll query it.
Adam
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:41:48AM +0200, Wladimir wrote:
Quoted text (27 lines)
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Melvin Carvalho > <[1]melvincarvalho@gmail•com> wrote: > > XP with a trezor would work fine tho? > > Probably - but that's a very rare edge case. People that are security > conscious enough to buy a Trezor will not run XP. Also I don't dare to > say that there is not some way to sociaal-engineer the user with > malware on a compromised OS even with a trezor. > Maybe: for 0.9.2 add a warning message and push people to upgrade > (either to Win8.1 or something else), then in the next major release > 0.10.0 drop XP support completely. > Wladimir > >References > > 1. mailto:melvincarvalho@gmail.com >------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >"Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >_______________________________________________ >Bitcoin-development mailing list >Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
On 4/16/2014 4:14 AM, Wladimir wrote:
Quoted text (38 lines)
> Hello, > > Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet > banking with Windows XP. > > If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not > secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as > they have no keys to protect). > > Any opinions on what to do here? Just warn and allow the user to > continue? Redirect them to a 'Windows XP is dangerous' message on > bitcoin.org <http://bitcoin.org>? (Microsoft uses > http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help) > > The drawback of dropping XP support completely would be that a lot of > computers (especially in China and Russia etc) are still running XP, > so this could cause the network to lose nodes. > > If you're maintainer of other wallet software: how are you handling this? > Are you going to drop XP support completely? If so, starting from when? > > Regards, > Wladimir > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is not secure enough? What is this warning? Who is issuing this warning?
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is > not secure enough?
Yes.
Quoted text (1 line)
> What is this warning?
Windows XP is no longer maintained. Don't use such a system for protecting your money.
Quoted text (1 line)
> Who is issuing this warning?
Microsoft: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help
The suggestion here is to make Bitcoin Core detect when it's running on Windows XP, and warn the user (they are likely unaware of the risks).
XP is no longer receiving security patches from Microsoft, and hasn't been for some time. There are known remote exploits that aren't going to be fixed, ever. On Apr 16, 2014 8:15 AM, "Kevin" <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (59 lines)
> On 4/16/2014 4:14 AM, Wladimir wrote: > > Hello, > > Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet > banking with Windows XP. > > If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not > secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as they > have no keys to protect). > Any opinions on what to do here? Just warn and allow the user to > continue? Redirect them to a 'Windows XP is dangerous' message on > bitcoin.org? (Microsoft uses > http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help) > > The drawback of dropping XP support completely would be that a lot of > computers (especially in China and Russia etc) are still running XP, so > this could cause the network to lose nodes. > > If you're maintainer of other wallet software: how are you handling this? > Are you going to drop XP support completely? If so, starting from when? > > Regards, > Wladimir > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today!http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > > > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing listBitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is > not secure enough? What is this warning? Who is issuing this warning? > > > -- > Kevin > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > >
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail•com>wrote:
Quoted text (6 lines)
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> wrote: > > I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is > > not secure enough? > > Yes. >
It will quickly grow extremely insecure.
People will be actively analyzing patches to post-XP versions to find security problems that are patched there, to see if they can be exploited on XP.
Wladimir
On 4/16/2014 11:28 AM, Wladimir wrote:
Quoted text (21 lines)
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Pieter Wuille > <pieter.wuille@gmail•com <mailto:pieter.wuille@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com > <mailto:kevinsisco61784@gmail.com>> wrote: > > I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume > that xp is > > not secure enough? > > Yes. > > > It will quickly grow extremely insecure. > > People will be actively analyzing patches to post-XP versions to find > security problems that are patched there, to see if they can be > exploited on XP. > > Wladimir >
Should we then add an alert message to wallet installers such as, "Such and such will not run on windows xp?"
On 04/16/2014 09:27 AM, Kevin wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> Should we then add an alert message to wallet installers such as, "Such > and such will not run on windows xp?"
It's not really our place to police that ... plus it's perfectly safe to be running Bitcoin Core as a full node on XP. It's just the wallet functionality that people should be careful about. We're talking about such a small intersection of people who are running XP, have systems powerful enough to run Bitcoin Core, and use the wallet functionality.
It may not be our place to say whether XP is secure or not, but if we say that we support it then we have to run test passes against XP as a platform, and if an XP user reports a bug, then we have to do something to address it. So, it becomes a test and support issue, not a security issue.
That’s why it doesn’t make sense to support an OS platform that the original vendor (MS) no longer supports themselves.
On Apr 16, 2014, at 9:35 AM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io> wrote:
Quoted text (20 lines)
> On 04/16/2014 09:27 AM, Kevin wrote: >> Should we then add an alert message to wallet installers such as, "Such >> and such will not run on windows xp?" > > It's not really our place to police that ... plus it's perfectly safe to > be running Bitcoin Core as a full node on XP. It's just the wallet > functionality that people should be careful about. We're talking about > such a small intersection of people who are running XP, have systems > powerful enough to run Bitcoin Core, and use the wallet functionality. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
We don't support XP. In fact we don't support *any* distribution, but I will assume you mean "provide a binary which runs on X." Can you find any reference to Windows XP on the website? I can't.
On 04/16/2014 09:41 AM, Chris Williams wrote:
Quoted text (27 lines)
> It may not be our place to say whether XP is secure or not, but if we say that we support it then we have to run test passes against XP as a platform, and if an XP user reports a bug, then we have to do something to address it. So, it becomes a test and support issue, not a security issue. > > That’s why it doesn’t make sense to support an OS platform that the original vendor (MS) no longer supports themselves. > > On Apr 16, 2014, at 9:35 AM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io> wrote: > >> On 04/16/2014 09:27 AM, Kevin wrote: >>> Should we then add an alert message to wallet installers such as, "Such >>> and such will not run on windows xp?" >> >> It's not really our place to police that ... plus it's perfectly safe to >> be running Bitcoin Core as a full node on XP. It's just the wallet >> functionality that people should be careful about. We're talking about >> such a small intersection of people who are running XP, have systems >> powerful enough to run Bitcoin Core, and use the wallet functionality. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >
You’re right. That’s a huge oversight. I think any software product you’ve ever considered installing has a section that says
“Hey, we want this much ram on your system, this much disk space, this processor, etc”.
Otherwise, you’re just setting yourself up for a bad user experience from people with marginal machines.
On Apr 16, 2014, at 9:44 AM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io> wrote:
Quoted text (32 lines)
> We don't support XP. In fact we don't support *any* distribution, but I > will assume you mean "provide a binary which runs on X." Can you find > any reference to Windows XP on the website? I can't. > > On 04/16/2014 09:41 AM, Chris Williams wrote: >> It may not be our place to say whether XP is secure or not, but if we say that we support it then we have to run test passes against XP as a platform, and if an XP user reports a bug, then we have to do something to address it. So, it becomes a test and support issue, not a security issue. >> >> That’s why it doesn’t make sense to support an OS platform that the original vendor (MS) no longer supports themselves. >> >> On Apr 16, 2014, at 9:35 AM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io> wrote: >> >>> On 04/16/2014 09:27 AM, Kevin wrote: >>>> Should we then add an alert message to wallet installers such as, "Such >>>> and such will not run on windows xp?" >>> >>> It's not really our place to police that ... plus it's perfectly safe to >>> be running Bitcoin Core as a full node on XP. It's just the wallet >>> functionality that people should be careful about. We're talking about >>> such a small intersection of people who are running XP, have systems >>> powerful enough to run Bitcoin Core, and use the wallet functionality. >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bitcoin-development mailing list >>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >>
On 4/16/2014 12:41 PM, Chris Williams wrote:
Quoted text (39 lines)
> It may not be our place to say whether XP is secure or not, but if we say that we support it then we have to run test passes against XP as a platform, and if an XP user reports a bug, then we have to do something to address it. So, it becomes a test and support issue, not a security issue. > > That's why it doesn't make sense to support an OS platform that the original vendor (MS) no longer supports themselves. > > On Apr 16, 2014, at 9:35 AM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io> wrote: > >> On 04/16/2014 09:27 AM, Kevin wrote: >>> Should we then add an alert message to wallet installers such as, "Such >>> and such will not run on windows xp?" >> It's not really our place to police that ... plus it's perfectly safe to >> be running Bitcoin Core as a full node on XP. It's just the wallet >> functionality that people should be careful about. We're talking about >> such a small intersection of people who are running XP, have systems >> powerful enough to run Bitcoin Core, and use the wallet functionality. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > > > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Okay, so we simply stop supporting it. Should bitcoin pull support altogether?
Not to get snarky or OS elitist but as I understand it windows security, even during its support period has been measured in low digit number of days in the year when is NOT an outstanding known remote root compromise or combination of remote user compromise + priviledge escalation. Add in phishing, watering holes, malware and the average windows computer is probably compromised a dozen times over. Apparently for sometime it was not easily possible to secure it install boot - install OS, connect to network to download security updates, IP range scanned and compromised faster than you can patch it.
Adam
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 05:28:27PM +0200, Wladimir wrote:
Quoted text (16 lines)
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Pieter Wuille > <[1]pieter.wuille@gmail•com> wrote: > > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <[2]kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> > wrote: > > I think we should get to the bottom of this. Â Should we assume that > xp is > > not secure enough? > > Yes. > > It will quickly grow extremely insecure. > People will be actively analyzing patches to post-XP versions to find > security problems that are patched there, to see if they can be > exploited on XP. > Wladimir
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 05:20:41PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote:
Quoted text (5 lines)
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> wrote: > > I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is > > not secure enough? > > Yes.
Do we need a similar warning for OS X 10.6? The EOL of that one is *far* less well known than XP (because of Apple's failure to communicate product lifecycles).
roy
Quoted text (28 lines)
> > > What is this warning? > > Windows XP is no longer maintained. Don't use such a system for > protecting your money. > > > Who is issuing this warning? > > Microsoft: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help > > The suggestion here is to make Bitcoin Core detect when it's running > on Windows XP, and warn the user (they are likely unaware of the > risks). > > -- > Pieter > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >
I think a warning like this is inappropriate.
There are many reasons to use an out of date operating system and high level applications like wallets need not concern themselves with the rest of the system. Maybe the wallet can scan your browser cache and tell you to stop visiting somesite.com too?
It just sounds like some kind of behavior modification that's being discussed here.. not-so-subtly suggesting that users shell out money for a newer version of the operating system, just to use their bitcoin wallets in a 'blessed' configuration. This actually sounds very similar to what happens with Apple iPhones.. they somehow manage to 'invalidate' the charging cables and accessories with every major software version. One day an accessory is working fine, then after the update users get a behavior modification nag every time they use it, urging them to buy a new one. Along these same lines, might as well put a warning about the registry keys needing to be cleaned, and maybe a 'shock the money' banner[1].
You guys all know how it works with financial software - there are many organizations using decades old software (and hardware) because they know its shortcomings, they've taken care of them in a way that works them, and they don't want to start all over just for the sake of having the newest version.
-Laszlo
[1] http://www.buzzfeed.com/adobe/obnoxious-banner-ads-that-everyone-remembers
On Apr 16, 2014, at 8:42 PM, Roy Badami <roy@gnomon•org•uk> wrote:
Quoted text (53 lines)
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 05:20:41PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> wrote: >>> I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is >>> not secure enough? >> >> Yes. > > Do we need a similar warning for OS X 10.6? The EOL of that one is > *far* less well known than XP (because of Apple's failure to > communicate product lifecycles). > > roy > > >> >>> What is this warning? >> >> Windows XP is no longer maintained. Don't use such a system for >> protecting your money. >> >>> Who is issuing this warning? >> >> Microsoft: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help >> >> The suggestion here is to make Bitcoin Core detect when it's running >> on Windows XP, and warn the user (they are likely unaware of the >> risks). >> >> -- >> Pieter >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >> > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
On 4/16/2014 5:10 PM, Laszlo Hanyecz wrote:
Quoted text (73 lines)
> I think a warning like this is inappropriate. > > There are many reasons to use an out of date operating system and high level applications like wallets need not concern themselves with the rest of the system. Maybe the wallet can scan your browser cache and tell you to stop visiting somesite.com too? > > It just sounds like some kind of behavior modification that's being discussed here.. not-so-subtly suggesting that users shell out money for a newer version of the operating system, just to use their bitcoin wallets in a 'blessed' configuration. This actually sounds very similar to what happens with Apple iPhones.. they somehow manage to 'invalidate' the charging cables and accessories with every major software version. One day an accessory is working fine, then after the update users get a behavior modification nag every time they use it, urging them to buy a new one. Along these same lines, might as well put a warning about the registry keys needing to be cleaned, and maybe a 'shock the money' banner[1]. > > You guys all know how it works with financial software - there are many organizations using decades old software (and hardware) because they know its shortcomings, they've taken care of them in a way that works them, and they don't want to start all over just for the sake of having the newest version. > > -Laszlo > > [1] http://www.buzzfeed.com/adobe/obnoxious-banner-ads-that-everyone-remembers > > > On Apr 16, 2014, at 8:42 PM, Roy Badami <roy@gnomon•org•uk> wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 05:20:41PM +0200, Pieter Wuille wrote: >>> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Kevin <kevinsisco61784@gmail•com> wrote: >>>> I think we should get to the bottom of this. Should we assume that xp is >>>> not secure enough? >>> Yes. >> Do we need a similar warning for OS X 10.6? The EOL of that one is >> *far* less well known than XP (because of Apple's failure to >> communicate product lifecycles). >> >> roy >> >> >>>> What is this warning? >>> Windows XP is no longer maintained. Don't use such a system for >>> protecting your money. >>> >>>> Who is issuing this warning? >>> Microsoft: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/end-support-help >>> >>> The suggestion here is to make Bitcoin Core detect when it's running >>> on Windows XP, and warn the user (they are likely unaware of the >>> risks). >>> >>> -- >>> Pieter >>> >>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >>> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >>> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >>> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Bitcoin-development mailing list >>> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >>> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book >> "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their >> applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, >> this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! >> http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech >> _______________________________________________ >> Bitcoin-development mailing list >> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Learn Graph Databases - Download FREE O'Reilly Book > "Graph Databases" is the definitive new guide to graph databases and their > applications. Written by three acclaimed leaders in the field, > this first edition is now available. Download your free book today! > http://p.sf.net/sfu/NeoTech > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge•net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Okay, so how about an autoupdate function which pulls a work around off the server? Sooner or later, the vulnerabilities must be faced.
On 04/16/2014 02:29 PM, Kevin wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> Okay, so how about an autoupdate function which pulls a work around off > the server? Sooner or later, the vulnerabilities must be faced.
NO. Bitcoin Core will never have an auto-update functionality. That would be a single point of failure whose compromise could result in the theft of every last bitcoin held in a Bitcoin Core wallet.
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Mark Friedenbach <mark@monetize•io> wrote:
Quoted text (7 lines)
> On 04/16/2014 02:29 PM, Kevin wrote: >> Okay, so how about an autoupdate function which pulls a work around off >> the server? Sooner or later, the vulnerabilities must be faced. > > NO. Bitcoin Core will never have an auto-update functionality. That > would be a single point of failure whose compromise could result in the > theft of every last bitcoin held in a Bitcoin Core wallet.
Or, even accidentally, cause a hard forking bug to be rolled out (or worsen one).
Bringing the thread back on-topic:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:14 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com> wrote:
Quoted text (7 lines)
> Hello, > Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet > banking with Windows XP. > If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not > secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as they > have no keys to protect). > Any opinions on what to do here?
I think eventually multi-wallet support will make it so that a wallet won't be created by default. Instead users would create-wallet, which would also give them options like using a HSM (e.g. trezor) or multisig secured wallet. That would be a great point where, if they elect to run and ordinary unsecured wallet, and the software detects that the host is known-to-not-likely-be-secure it could whine at them and direct them to a security best practices page.
Then you also avoid whining at people who never run a wallet or use a hsm making the host security somewhat moot.
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 10:14 PM, Ben Carroll <ben@q9y•net> wrote:
While forcefully dropping XP support would seem like a waste of time, and
Quoted text (5 lines)
> somewhat arbitrary. If windows builds just stops working for XP, it just > stops working, however I don't foresee that happening. I would make a > reasonable guess that the client probably would even run without fuss on > Win2k. >
The _WIN32_WINNT define that is used (0x0501) makes Windows XP the lowest version that the software will run on. It would be trivial to bump this to Windows Vista (0x0600).
But in that case the user won't get a helpful message, the software will outright refuse to run. So I thought, maybe it makes sense to show a message that XP support is going to be removed - which must happen sooner or later.
The insecurity of the platform adds urgence to this. So I thought "let's ask for advice on the mailing list".
But what I get is contortions into unrelated topics (what does auto-update have to do with this?), paranoid banter about 'manipulating users', diversions into other topics. Sure, there's a thin line between being helpful and being seen as manipulative, but it's over the top to compare this with in-browser banners. It could be so much as a one-time message.
But it's time to close this issue. I'll do nothing here. I will however stop testing on a Windows XP VM myself.
Wladimir
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 12:06 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail•com>wrote:
Quoted text (2 lines)
> Bringing the thread back on-topic: >
Thanks.
Quoted text (11 lines)
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 1:14 AM, Wladimir <laanwj@gmail•com> wrote: > > Hello, > > Today I noticed that even my bank is warning people to not do internet > > banking with Windows XP. > > If it is no longer secure enough for online banking it's CERTAINLY not > > secure enough to run a wallet (for a node only it would be ok-ish as they > > have no keys to protect). > > Any opinions on what to do here? > > I think eventually multi-wallet support will make it so that a wallet > won't be created by default.
After the wallet split-off this will also be easier:
- Bitcoin Core Node - Bitcoin Core Wallet
The node would be as compatible as possible with any OS in existence, but the wallet can be more picky.
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Instead users would create-wallet, which > would also give them options like using a HSM (e.g. trezor) or > multisig secured wallet.
HSMs complicate this; I'm not even sure how this will work, are the Trezor guys planning to contribute support for their device to wallets including Bitcoin Core?
Hopefully by that time, everyone will have forgotten about XP already :)
Wladimir
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 7:06 AM, Adam Back <adam@cypherspace•org> wrote:
Quoted text (4 lines)
> Btw not to reignite the stealth vs reusable address bike shedding, but > contrarily I was thinking it maybe actually better to try to rebrand address > as "invoice number". People understand double paying an invoice is not a > good idea. And if they receive the same invoice twice they'll query it.
And that is certainly how BitPay works today, including the language used.
On 04/16/2014 11:06 AM, Adam Back wrote:
Quoted text (5 lines)
> Btw not to reignite the stealth vs reusable address bike shedding, > but contrarily I was thinking it maybe actually better to try to > rebrand address as "invoice number". People understand double > paying an invoice is not a good idea. And if they receive the same > invoice twice they'll query it.
"Invoice number" is still too coarse-grained.
If anyone cared about user privacy, then whatever was supplied to users as an "invoice number" would be a BIP32 extended public key, or something equivalent to that, which would allow the payer to create as many unique addresses as they needed to avoid merging inputs.
Also, from a business accounting perspective it's broken and wrong to assume a 1:1 relationship between payment transactions and invoices anyway:
http://bitcoinism.blogspot.com/2014/01/business-accounting-and-bitcoin-privacy.html
- -- Support online privacy by using email encryption whenever possible. Learn how here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bakOKJFtB-k