some more info on the topic!

cheers!

cashu has a relatively new feature, that allows for partial offline payments. In general, all ecash payments can be done offline, since all it is is giving the ecash stored on one device to another device.

BUT, if you rely on only this for offline payments, there is a possibility for the sender to front run the receiver, and thus revert the payment.

This is because ecash notes are made of something called a secret and a sinature. If a person has both of these, they can spend the ecash. So as the receiver, you always have to make sure that you exchange secrets that are known by the sender, for new secrets that only you know. We call this a swap.

Regarding offline payments, as the sender, it is really simple. You don't need to be online, as long as you have the exact amount in coins you are trying to send. Then you can simply give the coins to the receiver.

For the receiver however, the problem we discussed above applies. There is a solution for this, made of two components. It does however require the sender to be online, because he needs to create custom notes at the mint (swap).

The technique for offline receive uses ecash with a lock to the receiver, and a offline verifiable signature. If an ecash note has both these components, the receiver can be confident that the sender cannot revert the transaction.

It is possible to create fully offline transactions, if you are able to lock ecash to the recipient in advance (while online). In this case, you usually need to have an additional refund spending condition with a timelock, that lets you get your unspent ecash back after the expiry. This is because you might know in advanve who you will be spending to, but maybe not the exact amount.

This is a simplified explanation, I left some things out. I might write an article on thia topic, i think there is a lot of interest around it.

https://snf2025.gandlaf.com/#/22 here is a small graphic for understanding

looks cooool

peak cronies

how can i vote for this

There is a way for mints to signal to wallets certain mesaages, but it depends on the wallets and implementations to support that and show it to the user in a meaningful way. I agree though, it would be nice if there was a better way to handle notifications. I think it's worth bringing it up again in the protocol discussion. I will do so

I have an Idea what it could be. I'm not sure if the vulnerability has been fully disclosed yet. But what they could do is use the seed to regenerate the messages, check on which of these signatures have been issued, unblind them, check which of them have been spent, and then refund the delta. Obviously this is a lot of manual effort, but I think it might make sense for mint operators to have some kind of a fallback restore tool that automates these kind of things. It needs to be built first though. I've started a discussion in the cashu R+D chat

I just checked, and the mint supports restore. They should be able to, unless they already purged the data for this keyset. which would be very premature.

correct

Not sure, but it says they syphoned off electricity, so is the issue that they didn't pay their electricity bill?

It's up to you, if you want to manage her page, you can write it from scratch or use something like https://jekyllrb.com/ as a static site generator. it gives you a bit more freedom, but at the cost of complexity

if you want to minimize your involvement and let her manage it, use one of the providers. they are very noob friendly, and after the initial setup it's very easy to change or add content, which is probably the only thing she will care about

Logseq is a great opensource tool for that

It's hosted on legend.lnbits , which is a testing service.

Yes 100% . We'll be working on it

appreciate your insights too!

One thing worth mentioning, the complexity of a stateless system is just so much lower than a stateful one, that it makes sense from an engineering perspective to consider if state is really necessary or if it's just an excuse to track users :P

But of course, sometimes you definitely need state/accounts/users , in which case PROXNUT may not help much

I think you could definitely hack something like that, but IMO as soon as you strart to introduce statefulness, other protocols start to make more sense.

Therfore, In the above example, i like number 3 the most, it leverages another protocol that is great for managing state

Ecash is kinda inherently stateless, because links get broken after every token creation. So you would have to manually upkeep that state somehow, which kinda defeats the purpose.

But I think that's OK, because there are other things (like L402, JWT, etc..) that handle state well!

wow, i said state so many times.... We need to separate the web from the state

Yes! I think Very similar to LL's L402 but some nuanced differences.

Check this answer on the AMA post for more details: #268791

oops, @supratic i think the pics/order are out of whack starting after the 'deterministic' chapter

welcome :D

correct, that should be seen as a disadvantage. If PROXNUT gets to a point where it is deployed into production environments and performance and speed are crucial, the mint should either run alongside proxnut, so verification time is negligible, or if we need to squeeze out even more performance, PROXNUT itself should become a mint.