Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YE2Ib-00047A-UD for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:54:49 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from wpsoftware.net ([96.53.77.134] helo=mail.wpsoftware.net) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1YE2IX-0003kS-M8 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:54:49 +0000 Received: from shavo.vs.shawcable.net (Cisco01253.vs.shawcable.net [192.168.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.wpsoftware.net (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id t0LKRbN2001453 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:27:38 -0800 Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 12:27:37 -0800 From: Andrew Poelstra To: Pieter Wuille Message-ID: <20150121202736.GZ29138@shavo.vs.shawcable.net> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="4tkssvp36SW1tyIS" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22+19 (8f62001989cc) (2013-10-16) 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 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1YE2IX-0003kS-M8 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] [softfork proposal] Strict DER signatures X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 20:54:50 -0000 --4tkssvp36SW1tyIS Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I've read this and it looks A-OK to me. Andrew On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 07:35:49PM -0500, Pieter Wuille wrote: > Hello everyone, >=20 > We've been aware of the risk of depending on OpenSSL for consensus > rules for a while, and were trying to get rid of this as part of BIP > 62 (malleability protection), which was however postponed due to > unforeseen complexities. The recent evens (see the thread titled > "OpenSSL 1.0.0p / 1.0.1k incompatible, causes blockchain rejection." > on this mailing list) have made it clear that the problem is very > real, however, and I would prefer to have a fundamental solution for > it sooner rather than later. >=20 > I therefore propose a softfork to make non-DER signatures illegal > (they've been non-standard since v0.8.0). A draft BIP text can be > found on: >=20 > https://gist.github.com/sipa/5d12c343746dad376c80 >=20 > The document includes motivation and specification. In addition, an > implementation (including unit tests derived from the BIP text) can be > found on: >=20 > https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/bipstrictder >=20 > Comments/criticisms are very welcome, but I'd prefer keeping the > discussion here on the mailinglist (which is more accessible than on > the gist). >=20 > --=20 > Pieter >=20 > -------------------------------------------------------------------------= ----- > New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. > GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. > Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. > Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. > http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development >=20 --=20 Andrew Poelstra Mathematics Department, University of Texas at Austin Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net Web: http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew "If they had taught a class on how to be the kind of citizen Dick Cheney worries about, I would have finished high school." --Edward Snowden --4tkssvp36SW1tyIS Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUwAu4AAoJEMWI1jzkG5fBSdUIAJpT4qg00B+/qwZqXEzvA/un yGgKqgt3B4XH3yO9Ih1rtCvc3LuZSSL+mTLRY2buoGN3X6xPn+IjlwLZrYwdxLRs J7WsXG/2ROK10Fiq8Ejl8vzY0L6Y+ZG03RznBViyGxcdRpN9iYcxFi+Ju78VRspE 574Raov6xHZxUdDYP6RMAxXdT97d5r8x6FnEPswZ4ae411U/6OJKqwDDRApbCAlI VxuEVzFAEQFth6hjnw5XeVDBOlC9FB7xHajtbQ/SHHKm9U5B7d3p1Mm9bPT6NKsE Y671/jo8H46lxZ1QDc9laCWQ0HrKmNVmBCTiiQqWK1BH+LfX/ZSJ9uv3uPgLi94= =yg+H -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --4tkssvp36SW1tyIS--