Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1VcOoR-0006AY-Tq for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 00:11:35 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from mail-vb0-f48.google.com ([209.85.212.48]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1VcOoQ-0007OG-6c for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sat, 02 Nov 2013 00:11:35 +0000 Received: by mail-vb0-f48.google.com with SMTP id o19so122343vbm.7 for ; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:11:28 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=xcbatL4HUIBsojI23uy7lbwCOOTtTixPPAl8OFGNPlc=; b=kLxpmbAmWJJF6G/n4Ag/lyWyCHTsdPnh87KyN1OhYKOg8kL1WlDFc+J5GUf8TpnSkM fcg2eDjGYNbBUVy07W0N+HShduCKxR5pwyWTsBPzUlauaB/SjMtEDru+146ZllPjtxH6 cr831rzMS/dWzDznJYI2/tEerguSWe4zOWcDQ0O94TGR/nadRcBqgMk6JgaeVxFctkj9 jCWR4GRfBVxuzBbvwQSxxfkcYlgLQ3l8iKOBCH5Gd2xY6051PBFLeODs7Ct20GOoZG86 +4H5gXl6cV7d3ZNQr0fTaNhHW/BplA3C3DHLu8Ooo2eq9PtjwxLSi5Z6GaL+rQ9eZQ/V UdxA== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkZgJin15Cvg21zGf1xTZUayaNIweUpJ6QgZbf+DcPFShOu9MuAmrd15p9pLRzaSTRGkuMR X-Received: by 10.220.169.203 with SMTP id a11mr1737581vcz.26.1383350681630; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 17:04:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: marek@palatinus.cz Received: by 10.59.1.2 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 17:04:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: slush Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2013 01:04:11 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9c-5jv1FxJ9Af54MHtvDfHqY_5w Message-ID: To: Brooks Boyd Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b6721c4fa97ba04ea266d7f X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: doubleclick.net] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (slush[at]centrum.cz) 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message X-Headers-End: 1VcOoQ-0007OG-6c Cc: "bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net" Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] BIP39 word list 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: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 00:11:36 -0000 --047d7b6721c4fa97ba04ea266d7f Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi Brooks, I've been already thinking about eat -> cat typing mistake. Actually there may be simplier solution than having wordlist with duplicated words. Because there's already a mapping of similar characters in the source code (currently only in unit test, but it can be moved), when user type a word which isn't in wordlist, application may try to use such mapping to find a combination which actually is in the mapping. This may be disambiguous in some cases, but giving a choice between few words may be better than hard fail. And it is actually quite easy to implement. Although I think application can do such smart suggestions and help user to recover badly written mnemonic, I don't think it is necessary to standardize such method directly into BIP. It may or may not be implemented by developers and it is just nice to have feature. Example: user type ear, but it isn't in wordlist. Regards the mapping, E is similar to A, C, F, O A is similar to E, C, O R is similar to B, P, H So application can calculate combinations of possible characters: a) when app consider than the the user mistyped only one character AAR, CAR, FAR, OAR EER, ECR, EOR EAB, EAP, EAH b) when app consider than user maybe mistyped more characters, it may do full combination matrix AEB, ACB, AOB, ... OEH, OCH, OOH and then ask user to select only these combinations which are actually presented in the wordlist. In this particular case it may be only CAR or FAR (both cannot be in the wordlist because of rules in similarity). Marek On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Brooks Boyd wrote: > I was inspired to join the mailing list to comment on some of these > discussions about BIP39, which I think will have great use in the Bitcoin > community and outside it as a way to transcribe binary data. > > The one thought I had as the discussions about similar characters are > resulting in culling words from the list, is that it only helps to validate > input, not help the user if it is incorrect. > > For example, if both "cat" and "eat" were in the word list, and someone > wrote down "eat", but later mis-translated it and put "cat" back into > translator, the result would be a checksum error; "cat" is a different > number, so the checksum would fail. > > As it currently stands, "cat" would not be a valid word ("eat" is the real > word, and no other number is "cat"), so the translator can throw a > different error which is more helpful (i.e. "'cat' isn't a valid word > choice), but still doesn't get the user to the proper translation. > > What about if the wordlist included those "words that are so similar to > each other that we only kept one of them" and had them all refer to the > same number? I propose the wordlist have the possibility of multiple words > on a single line, with the first word on the line being the "primary" or > "real" word to be used, with the other similar words be included so that a > translation program if it wanted to assist the user could fix their input > for them (verbosely or not), along the lines of "'cat' isn't a valid word > choice; assuming you meant 'eat', which is valid". You might still hit a > checksum error if that similar word is still the wrong word, but as it > stands now, I know you culled a bunch of words from the wordlist as "too > similar", but if I want to try and help the user fix a bad input, I need to > write a translation program with a full english dictionary alongside the > BIP39 dictionary. > > I'd be willing to create a pull request for such an update, but before I > delve into that, does this sound like a good idea? I could see it devolving > into a slippery slope if every number in the 2048 set had a dozen word > variations (misspellings, similar words, slang terms for the real word, > etc.) which could get confusing of how similar is similar enough to be > added as an alternate, and the standard would need to be clear that when > translating binary to words, you only use the "main" word for that row, not > any of the variations. > > MidnightLightning > > > > I've just pushed updated wordlist which is filtered to similar > characters taken from this matrix. > > BIP39 now consider following character pairs as similar: > > similar = ( > > ('a', 'c'), ('a', 'e'), ('a', 'o'), > > ('b', 'd'), ('b', 'h'), ('b', 'p'), ('b', 'q'), ('b', 'r'), > > ('c', 'e'), ('c', 'g'), ('c', 'n'), ('c', 'o'), ('c', 'q'), > ('c', 'u'), > > ('d', 'g'), ('d', 'h'), ('d', 'o'), ('d', 'p'), ('d', 'q'), > > ('e', 'f'), ('e', 'o'), > > ('f', 'i'), ('f', 'j'), ('f', 'l'), ('f', 'p'), ('f', 't'), > > ('g', 'j'), ('g', 'o'), ('g', 'p'), ('g', 'q'), ('g', 'y'), > > ('h', 'k'), ('h', 'l'), ('h', 'm'), ('h', 'n'), ('h', 'r'), > > ('i', 'j'), ('i', 'l'), ('i', 't'), ('i', 'y'), > > ('j', 'l'), ('j', 'p'), ('j', 'q'), ('j', 'y'), > > ('k', 'x'), > > ('l', 't'), > > ('m', 'n'), ('m', 'w'), > > ('n', 'u'), ('n', 'z'), > > ('o', 'p'), ('o', 'q'), ('o', 'u'), ('o', 'v'), > > ('p', 'q'), ('p', 'r'), > > ('q', 'y'), > > ('s', 'z'), > > ('u', 'v'), ('u', 'w'), ('u', 'y'), > > ('v', 'w'), ('v', 'y') > > ) > > Feel free to review and comment current wordlist, but I think we're > slowly moving forward final list. > > slush > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that > developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white > paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep > Android apps secure. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=65839951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > > --047d7b6721c4fa97ba04ea266d7f Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi Brooks,

I've been already thinki= ng about eat -> cat typing mistake. Actually there may be simplier solut= ion than having wordlist with duplicated words. Because there's already= a mapping of similar characters in the source code (currently only in unit= test, but it can be moved), when user type a word which isn't in wordl= ist, application may try to use such mapping to find a combination which ac= tually is in the mapping. This may be disambiguous in some cases, but givin= g a choice between few words may be better than hard fail. And it is actual= ly quite easy to implement. Although I think application can do such smart = suggestions and help user to recover badly written mnemonic, I don't th= ink it is necessary to standardize such method directly into BIP. It may or= may not be implemented by developers and it is just nice to have feature.<= /div>

Example:

use= r type ear, but it isn't in wordlist.

Regards the mapping,
E is similar to A, C, F, O
A is similar to E, C, O
R is similar to B, P, H<= /div>

So application can calculate combinati= ons of possible characters:

a) when ap= p consider than the the user mistyped only one character
AAR, CAR, FAR, OAR
EER, ECR, EOR
EAB, EAP, EAH

b) when app conside= r than user maybe mistyped more characters, it may do full combination matr= ix
AEB, =A0ACB, AOB, =A0... OEH, OCH, OOH

and then ask user to select only these combinations which are a= ctually presented in the wordlist. In this particular case it may be only C= AR or FAR (both cannot be in the wordlist because of rules in similarity).<= /div>

Marek


On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 9:14 PM, Brooks = Boyd <boydb@midnightdesign.ws> wrote:
I was inspired to join the = mailing list to comment on some of these discussions about BIP39, which I t= hink will have great use in the Bitcoin community and outside it as a way t= o transcribe binary data.

The one thought I had as the discussions about similar characters are resul= ting in culling words from the list, is that it only helps to validate inpu= t, not help the user if it is incorrect.

For example, if both "= cat" and "eat" were in the word list, and someone wrote down= "eat", but later mis-translated it and put "cat" back = into translator, the result would be a checksum error; "cat" is a= different number, so the checksum would fail.

As it currently stands, "cat" would not be a valid word (&quo= t;eat" is the real word, and no other number is "cat"), so t= he translator can throw a different error which is more helpful (i.e. "= ;'cat' isn't a valid word choice), but still doesn't get th= e user to the proper translation.

What about if the wordlist included those "words that are so simil= ar to each other that we only kept one of them" and had them all refer= to the same number? I propose the wordlist have the possibility of multipl= e words on a single line, with the first word on the line being the "p= rimary" or "real" word to be used, with the other similar wo= rds be included so that a translation program if it wanted to assist the us= er could fix their input for them (verbosely or not), along the lines of &q= uot;'cat' isn't a valid word choice; assuming you meant 'ea= t', which is valid". You might still hit a checksum error if that = similar word is still the wrong word, but as it stands now, I know you cull= ed a bunch of words from the wordlist as "too similar", but if I = want to try and help the user fix a bad input, I need to write a translatio= n program with a full english dictionary alongside the BIP39 dictionary.
I'd be willing to create a pull request for such an update, but bef= ore I delve into that, does this sound like a good idea? I could see it dev= olving into a slippery slope if every number in the 2048 set had a dozen wo= rd variations (misspellings, similar words, slang terms for the real word, = etc.) which could get confusing of how similar is similar enough to be adde= d as an alternate, and the standard would need to be clear that when transl= ating binary to words, you only use the "main" word for that row,= not any of the variations.

MidnightLightning

=A0
> I've just pushed updated wordl= ist which is filtered to similar characters taken from this matrix.
>= BIP39 now consider following character pairs as similar:
> =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 similar =3D (
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('a', 'c'), ('a', '= ;e'), ('a', 'o'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('= ;b', 'd'), ('b', 'h'), ('b', 'p'= ;), ('b', 'q'), ('b', 'r'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('c', 'e'), ('c', '= ;g'), ('c', 'n'), ('c', 'o'), ('c&#= 39;, 'q'), ('c', 'u'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 = =A0 ('d', 'g'), ('d', 'h'), ('d', &= #39;o'), ('d', 'p'), ('d', 'q'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('e', 'f'), ('e', '= ;o'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('f', 'i'), ('= ;f', 'j'), ('f', 'l'), ('f', 'p'= ;), ('f', 't'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('g', 'j'), ('g', '= ;o'), ('g', 'p'), ('g', 'q'), ('g&#= 39;, 'y'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('h', 'k'= ;), ('h', 'l'), ('h', 'm'), ('h', &= #39;n'), ('h', 'r'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('i', 'j'), ('i', '= ;l'), ('i', 't'), ('i', 'y'),
> = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('j', 'l'), ('j', 'p= 9;), ('j', 'q'), ('j', 'y'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('k', 'x'),
> =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('l', 't'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0= ('m', 'n'), ('m', 'w'),
> =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('n', 'u'), ('n', 'z'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('o', 'p'), ('o', '= ;q'), ('o', 'u'), ('o', 'v'),
> = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('p', 'q'), ('p', 'r= 9;),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('q', 'y'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('s', 'z'),
> =A0 =A0 = =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('u', 'v'), ('u', 'w'), (&#= 39;u', 'y'),
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 ('v', '= ;w'), ('v', 'y')
> =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 )
> Feel free to review and comment current word= list, but I think we're slowly moving forward final list.
> slush=

-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -------
Android is increasing in popularity, but the open development platform that=
developers love is also attractive to malware creators. Download this white=
paper to learn more about secure code signing practices that can help keep<= br> Android apps secure.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gam= pad/clk?id=3D65839951&iu=3D/4140/ostg.clktrk
___________________= ____________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment


--047d7b6721c4fa97ba04ea266d7f--