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
|
Return-Path: <mark@friedenbach.org>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3CBCF266
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 30 Sep 2017 23:51:53 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-pg0-f68.google.com (mail-pg0-f68.google.com [74.125.83.68])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98B101B4
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 30 Sep 2017 23:51:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pg0-f68.google.com with SMTP id u27so2036619pgn.1
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sat, 30 Sep 2017 16:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=friedenbach-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623;
h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
bh=u2C0nBdYPtI1NZm2vfCXq5f1aW4fncnEw/jiaDJsMjs=;
b=WrLJUih4/ooDGlVYnZL1MI8RmuadRCZr8AULTcspPyEwwhxeTV8RUSQJlwPuV3DHhn
JFZSoI2gG5F5ZZdHQiL4qGxKfLR5Veo5WJhaeY1p+g1vNucY7qHQzrZ/wuetB6q3HIO2
rO6Fpf1LPGYpQdWUNv5FFWIMiHbal0xQWvJ1rApxJzf5UdAJ+RcJAlQaObaq+BhmFjpI
pfGZYEcLVPuFNk33BzkCyfm4UG9BDTI4EhoAlgrJC+o0Bp5tWrEvgjiGPfEWo+yMXsvc
F5Sai6YsfXHqpfA7+72zOMdb2wcLA4muKMMdDN8hTsPZAPja2BL9zBi1+pcnGMyZw9h+
6SLA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to;
bh=u2C0nBdYPtI1NZm2vfCXq5f1aW4fncnEw/jiaDJsMjs=;
b=Fg1/Mb115wwdLFCnEBq1xW2lfL94fHIejEidicXaxcnnMWc0b05JztqIihy97ZBax5
2sZKxUmUb7tDhx2Dz4O8A4/QiJg16EzMekaLXuZoSoLwtOTXoZ+VKGJfuGcQJBudYz0G
mPItVeuodamDn59/rSKvi+O+D7d3Y+Q0z+IL1Fplt43qeCP+Z2gp9izXPH0tSoN6RZZj
QFDA2fPl6V8FkpYigGJwGIWOPsBMJrJtZt/GHXpU/nkmUKpZFTh4puhfQv9L8b3X9x5W
WN5xTB0Fs4gmd6By9+imnC3EXSgXDBbHrtGtmf9e1bK2+2B+x5Ev1DB247QbH38btwxF
YeUg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUiRwc+Uj2/+lkVGivA2uWePfrN3xi/MgTeYdmCc5hTP1FKklMOR
7AYs9yieSgmtboxAA/eVkdHbJI5g3hI=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDbC/CJfRqCIZkh3VY+F9Lcp6G201eWaiYVx68emU9WglGG/uj4lpI0D95rYM2/b0JybAgBrQ==
X-Received: by 10.84.129.193 with SMTP id b59mr10899439plb.43.1506815511970;
Sat, 30 Sep 2017 16:51:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:8080:1291:5d49:a7c9:37fd:aad8?
([2601:646:8080:1291:5d49:a7c9:37fd:aad8])
by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id
l3sm11520389pgn.36.2017.09.30.16.51.50
(version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
Sat, 30 Sep 2017 16:51:51 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset=gb2312
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Mark Friedenbach <mark@friedenbach.org>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (15A402)
In-Reply-To: <201709302323.33004.luke@dashjr.org>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 16:51:49 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <921EB5CF-B472-4BD6-9493-1A681586FB51@friedenbach.org>
References: <5B6756D0-6BEF-4A01-BDB8-52C646916E29@friedenbach.org>
<201709302323.33004.luke@dashjr.org>
To: Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org>
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.5 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,
MIME_QP_LONG_LINE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM autolearn=disabled version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 01 Oct 2017 02:27:42 +0000
Cc: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Merkle branch verification & tail-call semantics
for generalized MAST
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: Sat, 30 Sep 2017 23:51:53 -0000
10s of seconds if no further restrictions are placed. It would be trivial to=
include a new per input rule that reduces it to ~1s without cutting off any=
non-attack script (require sigops per input to be limited to witness/sig si=
ze). secp256k1 is now fast enough that we don=A1=AFt need a separate sigop l=
imit.
> On Sep 30, 2017, at 4:23 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr.org> wrote:
>=20
> On Thursday 07 September 2017 12:38:55 AM Mark Friedenbach via bitcoin-dev=
=20
> wrote:
>> Tail-call execution semantics
>> BIP: https://gist.github.com/maaku/f7b2e710c53f601279549aa74eeb5368
>> Code: https://github.com/maaku/bitcoin/tree/tail-call-semantics
>=20
> Just noticed this doesn't count sigops toward the block sigop limit.
> Is that really safe? How long would it take, to verify a malicious block w=
ith=20
> only inputs such that there is nearly 4 MB of sigops?
>=20
> (I do already understand the difficulty in supporting the sigop limit.)
>=20
> Luke
|
