SEP draft for Approved Investors

[John Wooten]

For accounts that issue different regulated assets (USD, NOK, EUR, SEK, ...), it's cumbersome (not to mention slow) for the issuer to manually confirm trustlines every time an approved account adds a new asset. Thinking about a SEP-1-like list of public addresses 'approved' as regulatorily needed by the issuer to hold assets.

Thus, explorers could just check if an address is in the approved list and authorized the trustline, no signing needed! Thoughts?... or is this simply infeasible? It would drastically change how trustlines can get verified in the name of efficiency. It's this vs. constantly querying for new trustline requests and referencing an internal database

[Alex Cordeiro]

Hi John!

Would you mind elaborating a bit more on your suggestion? At a first glance, I don't think we'd be able to achieve something like this at an ecosystem standard (SEP) level, since this would require a fundamental change in how trustline authorization works.

Trying to rephrase what you stated, are you looking for a mechanism for an issuer to provide a blanket trustline authorization for a given account? 

Example: 

1. Issuer1 issues AssetA:Issuer1 and AssetB:Issuer1, both set as AUTHORIZATION_REQUIRED = true
2. AccountX creates a trustline to AssetA:Issuer1, which is unauthorized by default
3. Issuer1 provides a blanket trustline authorization to AccountX. AccountX's trustline to AssetA:Issuer1 is now authorized
4. AccountX creates a trustline to AssetB:Issuer1. That trustline is automatically authorized because of the action in Step 3

On Thu, Feb 24, 2022 at 10:17 AM John Wooten <jo...@blocktransfer.io> wrote:

For accounts that issue different regulated assets (USD, NOK, EUR, SEK, ...), it's cumbersome (not to mention slow) for the issuer to manually confirm trustlines every time an approved account adds a new asset. Thinking about a SEP-1-like list of public addresses 'approved' as regulatorily needed by the issuer to hold assets.

Thus, explorers could just check if an address is in the approved list and authorized the trustline, no signing needed! Thoughts?... or is this simply infeasible? It would drastically change how trustlines can get verified in the name of efficiency. It's this vs. constantly querying for new trustline requests and referencing an internal database

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Stellar Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to stellar-dev...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/stellar-dev/1450ec43-eda9-4cdd-837a-88a90d21c42dn%40googlegroups.com.

--

Alex Cordeiro

Director of Engineering

Stellar Development Foundation

[John Wooten]

Hi Alex!

Yes, that well-scribed functionality is exactly right.