[bisq-network/proposals] Use of a third party to unlock the maker's trade reserve (#278)

[Chris Beams]

I'll just note that I read through this several times as well, am also impressed by the ideas, and am also unable to evaluate the cryptographic aspects. I wonder if this scheme might better be floated elsewhere as a general solution to the problem of storing unencrypted keys in memory to facilitate event-based signing. Somewhere that it could get attention from those with the requisite expertise who might in turn get interested in collaborating on implementing it here in Bisq.

>From a strategic / timing perspective, having this kind of thing on the roadmap in relation to the release of the Bisq API would make sense, as a successful API launch should eventually result in many more long-running Bisq nodes out there, and therefore a greater need for this kind of protection.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/proposals/issues/278#issuecomment-722237231
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20201105/09790fc1/attachment.html>