1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
|
Return-Path: <jb55@jb55.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 11661CEA
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:09:11 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from jb55.com (jb55.com [45.79.91.128])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ADA1817E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:09:10 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d= jb55.com;
h=from:to:subject:date:message-id; s=default;
bh=50qXm9SULuDJ2lIDtq2Ag2MTjYy0PoS+xui1G+Po9r0=;
b=X2g2oU8d2OtINQDWClZfm9Nx7fwWhEZGghxm1G+pkJJHqYJdBwf+dtEXrgLmyGVoJxqS+cgBeRzrxQRu2OcdJK/m7DE4PSOXov9qzCxr9jNVsZVLqYPcoP6Ghb9v3fyNk76p1EusXgCr9n4N4fK+lbJ6CupXjQtILzM7PNkNbR+N/MEgB05Rb0+FJGZogS2JHkgD2xQ49cGAfMi6HYLf9Wd2DEerhIofFvcchK6W052EGxhrZZsQ99vzJor4WvI0d2UPzDIZRg+BAPMeiyaQXcJzoCsOPu0/KtlLoU/6h0DehigiQ3iVHUjiPyDiFTrUTDpqvrN/3h+fbVz2p0mxSw==
Received: from jb55.com (S010660e327dca171.vc.shawcable.net [24.84.152.187])
by jb55.com (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id 5113f4fc
TLS version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256
verify=NO; Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:09:09 +0000 (UTC)
From: William Casarin <jb55@jb55.com>
To: Achow101 <achow101-lists@achow101.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <J0KV-aP96fSVHPkPw85N2qdKV_F5vqXt5fIFwKDp9wBjRKJ6bZpUEtzbgHyxlWW9PCXMOEVZnyUnJ-kW281ZbblbCp2sbZI_UyTP46q-PiY=@achow101.com>
References: <CAPg+sBhGMxXatsyCAqeboQKH8ASSFAfiXzxyXR9UrNFnah5PPw@mail.gmail.com>
<CHCiA27GTRiVfkF1DoHdroJL1rQS77ocB42nWxIIhqi_fY3VbB3jsMQveRJOtsJiA4RaCAVe3VZmLZsXVYS3A5wVLNP2OgKQiHE0T27P2qc=@achow101.com>
<21a616f5-7a17-35b9-85ea-f779f20a6a2d@satoshilabs.com>
<20180621195654.GC99379@coinkite.com>
<CAPg+sBgdQqZ8sRSn=dd9EkavYJA6GBiCu6-v5k9ca-9WLPp72Q@mail.gmail.com>
<ljk5Z_a3KK6DHfmPJxI8o9W2CkwszkUG34h0i1MTGU4ss8r3BTQ3GnTtDTfWF6J7ZqcSAmejzrr11muWqYN-_wnWw_0NFn5_lggNnjI0_Rc=@achow101.com>
<f8f5b1e3-692a-fc1e-2ad3-c4ad4464957f@satoshilabs.com>
<TGyS7Azu3inMQFv9QFn8USr9v2m5QbhDRmiOI-4FWwscUeuIB9rA7mCmZA4-kwCJOMAx92fO7XICHtE7ES_QmIYLDy6RHof1WLALskGUYAc=@achow101.com>
<c32dc90d-9919-354b-932c-f93fe329760b@satoshilabs.com>
<J0KV-aP96fSVHPkPw85N2qdKV_F5vqXt5fIFwKDp9wBjRKJ6bZpUEtzbgHyxlWW9PCXMOEVZnyUnJ-kW281ZbblbCp2sbZI_UyTP46q-PiY=@achow101.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jun 2018 23:09:09 -0700
Message-ID: <87k1qk7oca.fsf@jb55.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 09:27:31 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP 174 thoughts
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
<mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 06:09:11 -0000
Hey Andrew,
If I'm reading the spec right: the way it is designed right now, you
could create hundreds of thousands of zero bytes in the input or output
key-value arrays. As far as I can tell this would be considered valid,
as it is simply a large array of empty dictionaries. Is this right? I'm
worried about buffer overflows in cases where someone sends a large blob
of zeros to an unsuspecting implementation.
Also, the extensibility section reads:
> Additional key-value maps with different types for the key-value pairs
> can be added on to the end of the format.
"different types for the key-value pairs", is this referring to new
types beyond the current global, input and output types?
> The number of each map that follows must be specified in the globals
> section
Is this out of date? Since there is only one type in the global section
now (tx).
> so that parsers will know when to use different definitions of the
> data types
I'm not sure what this means.
Thanks!
Will
--
https://jb55.com
|
