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 ) id 1URFSj-0007gh-0B for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:26:49 +0000 X-ACL-Warn: Received: from zinan.dashjr.org ([173.242.112.54]) by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) id 1URFSh-0004sJ-If for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:26:48 +0000 Received: from ishibashi.localnet (unknown [173.170.142.26]) (Authenticated sender: luke-jr) by zinan.dashjr.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E9ADF27A2965 for ; Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:26:41 +0000 (UTC) From: "Luke-Jr" To: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:26:37 +0000 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.7.8-gentoo; KDE/4.10.1; x86_64; ; ) References: <20130414050958.GA11142@savin> In-Reply-To: <20130414050958.GA11142@savin> X-PGP-Key-Fingerprint: E463 A93F 5F31 17EE DE6C 7316 BD02 9424 21F4 889F X-PGP-Key-ID: BD02942421F4889F X-PGP-Keyserver: hkp://pgp.mit.edu MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201304140526.38940.luke@dashjr.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -0.7 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay domain X-Headers-End: 1URFSh-0004sJ-If Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] RFC: extend signmessage/verifymessage to P2SH multisig 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: Sun, 14 Apr 2013 05:26:49 -0000 On Sunday, April 14, 2013 5:09:58 AM Peter Todd wrote: > Currently signmessage/verifymessage only supports messages signed by a > single key. We should extend that to messages signed by n-of-m keys, or > from the users point of view, P2SH multisig addresses. I think it would be wise to figure out HD wallet changes before trying to extend message signing. For privacy/safety, it would be a good idea to avoid signing with the same private key twice under any circumstances, so it might make sense to create a new address format the represent a chain of keys instead of one key or combination of keys. Luke