Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2018 05:00:28 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRQk4EUp6FO2f+RkJpDTyZX0N4=uGp7ZF=0aUchZX8hSA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <51280a45-f86b-3191-d55e-f34e880c1da8@satoshilabs.com>
	<CAAS2fgRQk4EUp6FO2f+RkJpDTyZX0N4=uGp7ZF=0aUchZX8hSA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
To: Gregory Maxwell <greg@xiph.org>,
	Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	=?UTF-8?Q?Ond=C5=99ej_Vejpustek?= <ondrej.vejpustek@satoshilabs.com>
From: Matt Corallo <lf-lists@mattcorallo.com>
Message-ID: <08E5B040-973B-4089-9DA6-CE8AE6CF3D3B@mattcorallo.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Satoshilabs secret shared private key scheme
Precedence: list

Or make it a part of your secret-split logic=2E=2E=2E Gotta love how fast G=
F(2^8) is:
https://github=2Ecom/TheBlueMatt/shamirs/blob/master/main=2Ec#L57

On January 17, 2018 3:31:44 PM UTC, Gregory Maxwell via bitcoin-dev <bitco=
in-dev@lists=2Elinuxfoundation=2Eorg> wrote:
>If the generalization isn't obvious, it might be helpful to make a
>little test utility that tries all possible one byte messages with all
>possible share values using the GF(256) sharing scheme proposed in the
>draft-- in this case information theory is why we can know SSS (and
>similar) have (within their limited scope) _perfect_ security, rather
>than it being a reason to speculate that they might not turn out to be
>secure at all=2E (or, instead of a test utility just work through some
>examples on paper in a small field)=2E
>