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
|
Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <bip@mattwhitlock.name>) id 1WTulc-0004y4-Ie
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 29 Mar 2014 15:01:52 +0000
X-ACL-Warn:
Received: from qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.59.227])
by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1WTulb-0001uZ-Ot for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Sat, 29 Mar 2014 15:01:52 +0000
Received: from omta11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.36])
by qmta12.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast
id jRyC1n0080mv7h05CT1myc; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 15:01:46 +0000
Received: from crushinator.localnet ([IPv6:2601:6:4800:47f:219:d1ff:fe75:dc2f])
by omta11.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast
id jT1l1n01Q4VnV2P3XT1mfH; Sat, 29 Mar 2014 15:01:46 +0000
From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 11:01:45 -0400
Message-ID: <2288723.8YLNJJXu0j@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.12.3 (Linux/3.12.13-gentoo; KDE/4.12.3; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CAAS2fgRCuQ+WtaMOr45cPh6bFmajweSAfPJse85Rh3bYjtdE3Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1878927.J1e3zZmtIP@crushinator>
<CACsn0cn8cFn79dMi7M3uALE5KDFJOzxK4PdFyRR8j56FygnQZg@mail.gmail.com>
<CAAS2fgRCuQ+WtaMOr45cPh6bFmajweSAfPJse85Rh3bYjtdE3Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at http://www.dnswl.org/,
no trust [76.96.59.227 listed in list.dnswl.org]
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
X-Headers-End: 1WTulb-0001uZ-Ot
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Presenting a BIP for Shamir's Secret
Sharing of Bitcoin private keys
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: Sat, 29 Mar 2014 15:01:52 -0000
On Saturday, 29 March 2014, at 7:36 am, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Watson Ladd <wbl@uchicago.edu> wrote:
> > This is not the case: one can use MPC techniques to compute a
> > signature from shares without reconstructing the private key. There is
> > a paper on this for bitcoin, but I don't know where it is.
>
> Practically speaking you cannot unless the technique used is one
> carefully selected to make it possible. This proposal isn't such a
> scheme I beleieve, however, and I think I'd strongly prefer that we
> BIP standardize a formulation which also has this property.
I too would prefer that, but I do not believe there exists a method for computing a traditional signature from decomposed private key shares. Unless I'm mistaken, the composed signature has a different formula and requires a different verification algorithm from the ECDSA signatures we're using today. Thus, such a scheme would require a change to the Bitcoin scripting language. I specifically did not want to address that in my BIP because changes like that take too long. I am aiming to be useful in the present.
|
