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
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
|
Received: from sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.193]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>) id 1WNqOQ-00051Y-8d
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:08:50 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of me.com
designates 17.172.220.237 as permitted sender)
client-ip=17.172.220.237; envelope-from=jeanpaulkogelman@me.com;
helo=st11p02mm-asmtp002.mac.com;
Received: from st11p02mm-asmtp002.mac.com ([17.172.220.237])
by sog-mx-3.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WNqOP-00059V-An for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:08:50 +0000
Received: from st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com ([17.172.220.247])
by st11p02mm-asmtp002.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.08(7.0.4.27.7) 64bit
(built Aug
22 2013)) with ESMTP id <0N2C00HY1DE9AL20@st11p02mm-asmtp002.mac.com>
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed,
12 Mar 2014 21:08:34 +0000 (GMT)
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure
engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87,1.0.14,0.0.0000
definitions=2014-03-12_07:2014-03-12, 2014-03-12,
1970-01-01 signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0
suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam
adjust=0
reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1401130000
definitions=main-1403120125
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_PU1YwDCTYPlEml5P+SxP/w)"
Received: from localhost ([17.172.220.223]) by st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com
(Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-27.01(7.0.4.27.0) 64bit
(built Aug
30 2012)) with ESMTP id <0N2C002EUDE9WV90@st11p02mm-spool002.mac.com>;
Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:08:33 +0000 (GMT)
To: Pavol Rusnak <stick@gk2.sk>
From: Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogelman@me.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:08:33 +0000 (GMT)
X-Mailer: iCloud MailClient14A49 MailServer14A.15417
X-Originating-IP: [159.153.138.53]
Message-id: <994afcd1-798d-452a-850c-02b5ce393dd3@me.com>
In-reply-to: <5320C27B.8090205@gk2.sk>
X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
0.0 MIME_QP_LONG_LINE RAW: Quoted-printable line longer than 76 chars
X-Headers-End: 1WNqOP-00059V-An
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [RFC] Proposal: Base58 encoded HD Wallet
root key with optional encryption
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 21:08:50 -0000
--Boundary_(ID_PU1YwDCTYPlEml5P+SxP/w)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
=0A=0AOn Mar 12, 2014, at 01:24 PM, Pavol Rusnak <stick@gk2.sk> wrote:=0A=0A=
On 03/12/2014 09:10 PM, William Yager wrote:=0Aimplement this is to allow =
semi-trusted devices (like desktop PCs) to do=0Aall the "heavy lifting". T=
he way the spec is defined, it is easy to have a=0Amore powerful device do=
all the tough key stretching work without=0Asignificantly compromising th=
e security of the wallet.=0A=0ABy disclosing "preH" to compromised compute=
r (between steps 4 and 5) you=0Amake further steps 5-9 quite less importan=
t.=0A=A0=0AAgreed, this is a valid concern. This could possibly allow a 3r=
d party to crack the password, but then again, they would not gain access =
to any key material. So yes, you could expose your password, but your key =
would still be safe.=0A=0AIf people feel strongly about this vulnerability=
, we can revisit step 4 and adjust it to make password recovery more expen=
sive.=0A=0Ajp=
--Boundary_(ID_PU1YwDCTYPlEml5P+SxP/w)
Content-type: multipart/related;
boundary="Boundary_(ID_/ezT6xeHVXjD2nriQVNfSA)"; type="text/html"
--Boundary_(ID_/ezT6xeHVXjD2nriQVNfSA)
Content-type: text/html; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable
<html><body><div><br><br>On Mar 12, 2014, at 01:24 PM, Pavol Rusnak <stick@gk2.sk&g=
t; wrote:<br><br></div><div><blockquote type=3D"cite"><div class=3D"msg-qu=
ote"><div class=3D"_stretch">On 03/12/2014 09:10 PM, William Yager wrote:<=
br><blockquote class=3D"quoted-plain-text" type=3D"cite">implement this is=
to allow semi-trusted devices (like desktop PCs) to do</blockquote><block=
quote class=3D"quoted-plain-text" type=3D"cite">all the "heavy lifting". T=
he way the spec is defined, it is easy to have a</blockquote><blockquote c=
lass=3D"quoted-plain-text" type=3D"cite">more powerful device do all the t=
ough key stretching work without</blockquote><blockquote class=3D"quoted-p=
lain-text" type=3D"cite">significantly compromising the security of the wa=
llet.</blockquote><br> By disclosing "preH" to compromised computer (betwe=
en steps 4 and 5) you<br> make further steps 5-9 quite less important.</di=
v></div></blockquote><span> </span></div><div>Agreed, this is a valid=
concern. This could possibly allow a 3rd party to crack the password, but=
then again, they would not gain access to any key material. So yes, you c=
ould expose your password, but your key would still be safe.</div><div><sp=
an style=3D"line-height: 1.5;"><br></span></div><div><span style=3D"line-h=
eight: 1.5;">If people feel strongly about this vulnerability, we can revi=
sit step 4 and adjust it to make password recovery more expensive.</span><=
/div><div><span style=3D"line-height: 1.5;"><br></span></div><div><span st=
yle=3D"line-height: 1.5;">jp</span></div></body></html>=
--Boundary_(ID_/ezT6xeHVXjD2nriQVNfSA)--
--Boundary_(ID_PU1YwDCTYPlEml5P+SxP/w)--
|
