Re: USE CASE: HTTP URI denoting a Bank-Account?

I do absolutely prefer users have their own fqdn...  It's a no-brainer to me, whilst I also appreciate the difficulties most people experience managing a domain and that poorly deployed fqdn's for individuals, may end-up with greater potential harm of lock-in, than simpler addresses..

However, 

Given these types of addresses can simply be a method to 'denote' a payment location for the Purposes of sending money to an address, at web-scale, I guess the devil is in the detail.

Certainly, your notes about digital cash got me thinking...  :) 

I think webcredits can do the crypto stuff; but I'm not sure of the identifier structure.  In your text, you suggested some form of DNS record attached to a domain.  I imagine that is certainly a very positive gateway method, and certainly. DNS for subdomains could be directed as you suggested previously, in different ways to connect to different financial servers. 

I guess, the other constituent was that say a service exists to send money to others.  Others can say how they want to be paid, perhaps an address is generated to pay an array of people, in an array of different formats, for percentages of a transaction.

Bitcoin addresses are easy.  What is more difficult is finding some way of having an address that, say, denotes I want money to go into my Aussie bank account called "rewards for good internet technology contributions".  It might have no funds in it, and is simply there (akin to an account linked to a PayPal address) for the purposes of. Receiving those funds, via my www identifier. 

Banks hate bitcoin.  But the simple reality is, they've provided no easy alternative.  I can buy a bitcoin (which is strictly unnecessary step) then plug in the address of someone else who's got one, and send them "funds". I can't do that easily with my Aussie bank account.   So in terms of the functionality scope for web-payments standards, seemed like an important use-case to ensure was included as part of the scope of works...

Perhaps how it works is a different part of the process again...

Sent from my iPad

> On 4 Jun 2014, at 6:55 pm, Dave Lampton <dave.lampton@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Certainly not going to appear to be a problem on the surface, but I feel it's a vulnerability, yes.
> 
> 
> Dave Lampton
>  @dave_lampton
>  DaveLampton
>  +DaveLampton
> www.linkedin.com/in/davelampton/
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 1:50 AM, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Do you believe this flaw affects bitcoin addresses also??
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>>> On 4 Jun 2014, at 6:48 pm, Dave Lampton <dave.lampton@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Having already given this question some thought, I'd already decided that a URI is probably not the best solution. It makes it too easy for one server to start serving as an account/wallet for lots of people at once, which may seem harmless enough at first, but it may be enough if those people simply know each others' specific URIs it may be enough to start gaming the system or otherwise trying to hack each other.
>>> 
>>> Therefore in my opinion, URI specification is inadequate and accounts/wallets/money bags/whatever you wanna call them should each be completely specified by a FQDN (host-specific while ignoring path), such that no two wallets/accounts share the same FQDN. That does also mean that every possessor of a wallet must first possess a domain and/or a subdomain that nobody but they control. (These can easily be managed via existing registrar ownership and transfer regulations and of course, the DNS system.)
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Dave Lampton
>>>  @dave_lampton
>>>  DaveLampton
>>>  +DaveLampton
>>> www.linkedin.com/in/davelampton/
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 11:36 PM, Tim Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> I was wondering about how some form of HTTP URI might be provided to a bank-account customer.  Banking systems currently have an array of different identifiers that are provided between parties for the purposes of transferring funds (say, from parents to children, etc.) Existing account details work within banking systems (SWIFT codes, BSB / Account Numbers, etc.); however i couldn’t find the schema available to provide a HTTP URI of a bank account at Web-Scale?
>>>> 
>>>> I envisage this to be similar to a crypto-currency address, perhaps with a relation to an institution? 
>>>> 
>>>> EXAMPLE (not syntactically accurate for web-payments / payswarm)
>>>> 
>>>> whereas; 
>>>> 
>>>> IdP: bitcoin 
>>>> ADDRESS: 12V7BYH4jPTeeWXfEKJ1rrifizgdvkrzsU (example only)
>>>> Amount: 1 
>>>> valueFormat; bitcoin
>>>> 
>>>> now therefore;
>>>> 
>>>> IdP: Westpac.AU
>>>> Address: 123546799876688232234 (example only - account doesn’t exist to my knowledge)
>>>> Amount $1.00
>>>> valueFomat: AUD
>>>> 
>>>> Therein; I have a foaf profile document: http://ubiquitous.rww.io/profile/card#me whereby i can list or insert my bitcoin addresses.  How can an individual create a HTTP identifier / method for a traditional banking accounts?  Equally, the address could be converted into a QRCode or other form, denoting the same details (and enabling the same transaction). 
>>>> 
>>>> Is defining a HTTP URI identifying a bank account; and, To use a HTTP URI to make a transaction to a bank-account, between institutional banking providers (?) within scope…
>>>> 
>>>> does a method already exist (as provided by banking institutions, not via intermediary, such as paypal)?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>