WU added or Bisq Fork?


#41

Can we add some descentralized service to store data where the buyer have to allow check the receipt, maybe sia or storj?


#42

Are they working properly, last time I checked it was missing the basic features…


#43

Yes, it is :slight_smile: Someone can made mistakes on the name/lastname of the seller. He/her need to comeback to WU and fix that. That is why the seller need to see the receipt photo. It is necessary to know the country sender and the amounto of money too :slight_smile:


#44

Yes, they allwas ask about the amount of money to collect. But seller receive all the money. The buyer has to spend Amount of the buy + Fees. And is not more than 10% here in Latinamerica. Even there is a service here where you can send money cheaper but the other person has to wait for 24 hours to collect money

Even with 10% of fees, WU is cheaper service for everyone here and very easy :slight_smile: Because you do not need banks accounts, you don’t need to have a credit card and of course you don’t need to pay 40% Localbitcoins overprice hehe


#45

Yes, even K.im (Kim dot com services is going to run on them)


#46

Okay I was probably skeptical because of madesafecoin; endless whitepaper and no real progress.


#47

Yes would be great but its quite an effort and challenge. For testing a whole process like a trade it requires mocking the P2P network, the BTC part (thats the hardest) and the UI interactions. Once we have more resources it would be definitely cool to get more automated tests for those areas but so far it would eat up too much resources we need for other stuff.


#48

@Nolaan I just saw you forked from master. I would recommend to use the Development branch as there are a lot of changes and merging will be easier. You need to recompile to get the correct Protobuffer generated classes when changing to dev branch.

There will also very soon (today) be merged a PR where we update to another Tor library which will remove the 4 Tor modules. Maybe those have broken your UML?


#49

I am also skeptical if they are “production ready”. Last time I tried it out it was super slow. It would also cause a lot of engineering effort to integrate that for such a minor feature. If the photo upload is highly demanded we can still do it in our P2P network, I just try to be conservative to only add the absolute needed to not overload it and not expose it to too many attack surfaces. Another simple approach is to use any http photo upload service and just send the link. The service should support Tor (no cloudflare), then we could even integrate it to show the image in the app. Of course carries privacy issues if the image contains personal data. Encrypting it and decrypting the uploaded file before display might be another approach…


#50

Slowly but surely :wink:

No ideas, seems to me like a recursion in network/p2p/network. I couldn’t investigate more. I’ll try again after the PR merge.

This is what I used to understand how an offer and a payment account relate to each other. I didn’t go to the details because of the bug. I also have a sequence diagram somewhere.


#51

Yes that’s a good start:

easiest is if you search for occurrence of other accounts (e.g. sepa) and see where and what to change/add. There are some view classes, domain, protobuffer and translation strings.

New classes to create are:

  • WesternUnionAccountPayload
  • WesternUnionAccount
  • WesternUnionForm
  • WesternUnionValidator

The classes you need to touch are:

FiatAccountsView
BuyerStep2View
PaymentAccountFactory
CoreProtoResolver

Protobuffer:

  • pb.proto

translations files (only english file):

  • search for CASH_DEPOSIT=Cash Deposit

#52

Cool looks like what I did, so I will just change the logic in the code behind and I’m ready to submit the PR.


#53

Cool! Please cross check with @diegotco if the provided fields are sufficient and if the way how the receipt and/or tracking number is exchanged is correct. I will not have time to investigate WU process and I am not familiar with it.


#54

I’d go with that suggestion if it’s needed at all, as it seems to have the least friction and low risk and would provide a safety net in case someone makes a mistake sending the money as @diegotco mentioned.


#55

Also, photo is important to validate payment because buyer may show a whatever MTCN number that already has been collected but it doesn’t means that the sender/receiver names, amount and country are ok. That’s why we need to use only this WU URL: https://www.westernunion.com/es/en/track-transfer.html

This website ask the amount in the receiver’s country currency :slight_smile:


#56

@Nolaan I am close to the release code freeze. If you can deliver before 10. November and there are no issues with the PR it likely can go into the release, otherwise into the next release.


#57

I’m hurrying up, didn’t have as much time I wanted. Anyway I’ve already rebased onto the Development branch and started the tests on regtest network. If I’m good enough I PR tonight.


#58

Thank you @Nolaan all the community are in debt with you. May I have you btc address? I want you be rewarded by Latin American community


#59

Due the B2X canceling we are a bit more relaxed with release. I can help if there are small issues open and with testing. You can make a PR as soon its more or less ok and i will check.


#61

@diegotco @Nolaan:
I merged the PR from @Nolaan and added the missing parts.
Here are screenshots from the relevant screens. Please check and let me know if those data and the trade process is correct with WU.
There is a restriction that you can only send money with the same currency. To support multi currencies would require more effort.

Account setup:

Save account info:

Account view:

Send funds info 1:

Send funds info 2:

Received funds popup:

Received funds data for pick up: