From: Matt Whitlock <bip@mattwhitlock.name>
To: jan.moller@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 04:29:26 -0400
Message-ID: <2336265.urqHVhRi8n@crushinator>
User-Agent: KMail/4.13 (Linux/3.12.13-gentoo; KDE/4.13.0; x86_64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <CABh=4qOQhxEte3yQfCMNOZdedExtpqARQRDSfxQMqk-2KwJamw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAC7yFxSE8-TWPN-kuFiqdPKMDuprbiVJi7-z-ym+AUyA_f-xJw@mail.gmail.com>
	<1927948.OEZHQcsQ9n@crushinator>
	<CABh=4qOQhxEte3yQfCMNOZdedExtpqARQRDSfxQMqk-2KwJamw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Cc: bitcoin-development <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Presenting a BIP for Shamir's Secret
	Sharing of Bitcoin private keys
Precedence: list

On Tuesday, 22 April 2014, at 10:27 am, Jan M=F8ller wrote:
> > >  - Please allow M=3D1. From a usability point of view it makes se=
nse to
> > allow
> > > the user to select 1 share if that is what he wants.
> >
> > How does that make sense? Decomposing a key/seed into 1 share is
> > functionally equivalent to dispensing with the secret sharing schem=
e
> > entirely.
> >
> >
> I agree that it may look silly to have just one-of-one share from a
> technical point of view, but from an end-user point of view there cou=
ld be
> reasons for just having one piece of paper to manage. If M can be 1 t=
hen
> the software/hardware doesn't have to support multiple formats,
> import/export paths + UI  (one for SIPA keys in one share, one for HD=
 seeds
> in one share, one for SIPA keys + HD seeds in multiple shares).
>=20
> Less complexity & more freedom of choice.

Alright. It's a fair argument. Do you agree with encoding M using a bia=
s of -1 so that M up to and including 256 can be encoded in one byte?