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
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
|
Return-Path: <apoelstra@wpsoftware.net>
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::138])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBD37C002D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:04:27 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEE4783FA5
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:04:27 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org AEE4783FA5
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.517
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.517 tagged_above=-999 required=5
tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_HELO_FCRDNS=0.399, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982,
SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id qkOC45krogE8
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:04:26 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: delayed 00:07:33 by SQLgrey-1.8.0
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org D358783FB2
Received: from mail.wpsoftware.net (s66-183-0-205.bc.hsia.telus.net
[66.183.0.205])
by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D358783FB2
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:04:26 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from camus (camus-andrew.lan [192.168.0.190])
by mail.wpsoftware.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 539D040098;
Thu, 29 Sep 2022 23:55:07 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2022 23:56:51 +0000
From: Andrew Poelstra <apoelstra@wpsoftware.net>
To: darosior <darosior@protonmail.com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Message-ID: <YzYww1keXKYoX2tk@camus>
References: <CAMhCMoHfdsQMsVigFqPexTE_q-Cyg7pfRvORUoy2sZtvyzd1cg@mail.gmail.com>
<osdF1jSCUyGyaLZ6YytSB7ub1MwdbaP6PMCYEJZXmMRaSs4vS7bs_SZTErxZh_K7oLYLAtAqqgl0Vcdl1ftAusM_1DHSDHtz1kSUzqnmwsk=@protonmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Ud2Vjxoi6HE8P/FY"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <osdF1jSCUyGyaLZ6YytSB7ub1MwdbaP6PMCYEJZXmMRaSs4vS7bs_SZTErxZh_K7oLYLAtAqqgl0Vcdl1ftAusM_1DHSDHtz1kSUzqnmwsk=@protonmail.com>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Wallet policies for descriptor wallets
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Fri, 30 Sep 2022 00:04:27 -0000
--Ud2Vjxoi6HE8P/FY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm really happy to see this discussion. I don't have any comments on the s=
pec
because I think I'd have to be more in-the-weeds trying to implement a hww =
to
understand how well it works for realistic use cases. But a strong concept-=
ACk
=66rom me and thanks to Salvatore for exploring this!
On Mon, May 09, 2022 at 11:36:47AM +0000, darosior via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>=20
> Unrelated question, since you mentioned `musig2` descriptors in this cont=
ext. I thought Musig2 wasn't really
> feasible for hardware signing devices, especially stateless ones. Do you =
think/know whether it is actually
> possible for a HW to take part in a Musig2?
>
As Salvatore mentioned in his reply, there are a couple ways that hwws can =
deal
with musig2 -- specifically, having state (and I believe you can get away w=
ith
as little state as a single monotonic counter) or having a RNG which is rel=
iable
enough that it at least won't repeat values.
Because these aren't blockers for all hwws, even if they are blockers for s=
ome,
I'd really like to see musig2 support in these protocols, or at least for m=
usig2
to be considered in their design.
=20
--=20
Andrew Poelstra
Director of Research, Blockstream
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
The sun is always shining in space
-Justin Lewis-Webster
--Ud2Vjxoi6HE8P/FY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEkPnKPD7Je+ki35VexYjWPOQbl8EFAmM2MMIACgkQxYjWPOQb
l8EHRwgAmuWHcPIliFGJWF8joI6u/jAd32ttP/B9x6f4nWe8/7MqtfzJF7dVKvQF
7LKAVtXDy/8eD89I78jMCmGDenPAJwrrlG9zGZg5L6qWHiyPsDp67E7TXul4e3eD
Qzqsob062FMsip6vR1jHMpMGDnZ2eyDpFooNNlaAU66kpBCpmOjR64RURPKK7XNY
vo3QH9n0B+AGC7BOEc9TIrtrjR9UdhGMCpxYggupRxiwX/KVcjzbTiwGiA8DGM5h
0ZnNLd1vSGv0IBpUisbK2lm1co9tu7LFkXkYFe55nuzn2b3eAH90X5p6d0qwHVBj
XvEsbYB4P4cidLS0+3VA9Qvpise+uQ==
=zYLG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Ud2Vjxoi6HE8P/FY--
|
