Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
	designates 209.85.213.41 as permitted sender)
	client-ip=209.85.213.41; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
	helo=mail-yh0-f41.google.com; 
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgTBxSfpuANP0+J1UM2nWOxQASYFBCQFW1D5L2j3DWRx-A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPg+sBgPG+2AMbEHSRQNFn6FikbRzxkWduj5MSZLz-O6Wh940w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALf2ePwc=es-aDSeJO2DZwu9kyHwq9dcp5TrMAhN-dvYwNjy-w@mail.gmail.com>
	<52FBD948.906@monetize.io> <201402122252.31060.luke@dashjr.org>
	<CAPWm=eV9YP3wAbCFt1JcSqJ6Jc3kY_546MVk3cHT+X8seC8vRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgSwjGohhiXuwhG3bJ5mLxSS8Dx0Hytmg7PhhRzwnw7FNQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<EFA82A3F-2907-4B2B-9FCB-DCA02CA4EC63@mac.com>
	<CAPg+sBgnuNygR7_yny1=+wGWmeLcub0A8_ep3U-5ewmQJk71jw@mail.gmail.com>
	<601EE159-9022-4ADF-80AC-7E1C39E86A65@mac.com>
	<CAPg+sBg9=XK=PGSW8DcU1LR85oeTDmpS4U-vYUXbraZQpU+edg@mail.gmail.com>
	<81A62AB7-9EC6-439E-96CF-F064F0151BB9@mac.com>
	<CANEZrP26U3BjEi66xjD9SRxrAupGmYC6mKiYYw27BH3q1b1hLQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgSm9o-Xz4i0_wPGPfh_108ttnNPkXtxv5hCj9CsJh=AXQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABsx9T1R+2rBa1VkaJiS3ktAgoMaBHfkUb3kXxwpHSxjtqNrRw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAAS2fgTBxSfpuANP0+J1UM2nWOxQASYFBCQFW1D5L2j3DWRx-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 09:58:30 -0500
Message-ID: <CABsx9T3bf-f7VhuRMQhvce16mSent5SzUn1ZbwpbnWAvvU6S8Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3010ea2508051804f2d7bd17
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] [BIP proposal] Dealing with
	malleability
Precedence: list

--20cf3010ea2508051804f2d7bd17
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Great, I'm hearing rough consensus to proceed with Pieter's plan.

RE: far from confident on malleability routes:  I'm reasonably confident
that we can squash malleability for IsStandard, SIGHASH_ALL transactions. A
proper proof of DSA signature un-malleability (or an lower bound for how
much work it would be to create a valid doppleganger signature) would be
great, but I don't think it is necessary to proceed.


On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I think we should get Pieter's proposal done and implemented quickly. I
> > agree with Mike, it doesn't have to take a long time for the core
> network to
> > fully support this.
> >
> > Getting wallets to start generating transaction.version=3 might take
> years,
> > but that is OK.
>
> Sure I'm all for doing what Pieter suggested-- it's basically the plan
> we've been executing for some time already but with the version check
> to make it sane to complete.
>
> My reserved sounding comments were relative to the proposals to do
> things with nversion=1 transactions, frankly I think thats completely
> insane. Though while we're on the subject of reservations, I am far
> from confident that we've uncovered all the possible malleability
> routes-- that list gained a new, never before discussed entry, when
> Pieter was writing it a couple weeks ago.  We also have no proof of
> the absence of further algebraic malleability in DSA (though I think
> its somewhat unlikely, a solid proof of it has been somewhat elusive).
>



-- 
--
Gavin Andresen

--20cf3010ea2508051804f2d7bd17
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">Great, I&#39;m hearing rough consensus to proceed with Pie=
ter&#39;s plan.<div><br></div><div>RE: far from confident on malleability r=
outes: &nbsp;I&#39;m reasonably confident that we can squash malleability f=
or IsStandard, SIGHASH_ALL transactions. A proper proof of DSA signature un=
-malleability (or an lower bound for how much work it would be to create a =
valid doppleganger signature) would be great, but I don&#39;t think it is n=
ecessary to proceed.</div>
</div><div class=3D"gmail_extra"><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu,=
 Feb 20, 2014 at 9:36 AM, Gregory Maxwell <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"=
mailto:gmaxwell@gmail.com" target=3D"_blank">gmaxwell@gmail.com</a>&gt;</sp=
an> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class=3D"HOEnZb"><div class=3D"h5">On T=
hu, Feb 20, 2014 at 6:29 AM, Gavin Andresen &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:gavinandr=
esen@gmail.com">gavinandresen@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>

&gt; I think we should get Pieter&#39;s proposal done and implemented quick=
ly. I<br>
&gt; agree with Mike, it doesn&#39;t have to take a long time for the core =
network to<br>
&gt; fully support this.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Getting wallets to start generating transaction.version=3D3 might take=
 years,<br>
&gt; but that is OK.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Sure I&#39;m all for doing what Pieter suggested&mdash; it&#39;=
s basically the plan<br>
we&#39;ve been executing for some time already but with the version check<b=
r>
to make it sane to complete.<br>
<br>
My reserved sounding comments were relative to the proposals to do<br>
things with nversion=3D1 transactions, frankly I think thats completely<br>
insane. Though while we&#39;re on the subject of reservations, I am far<br>
from confident that we&#39;ve uncovered all the possible malleability<br>
routes&mdash; that list gained a new, never before discussed entry, when<br=
>
Pieter was writing it a couple weeks ago. &nbsp;We also have no proof of<br=
>
the absence of further algebraic malleability in DSA (though I think<br>
its somewhat unlikely, a solid proof of it has been somewhat elusive).<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br>--<br>Gavin =
Andresen<br>
</div>

--20cf3010ea2508051804f2d7bd17--