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
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <jeremy@taplink.co>) id 1VU8WL-0005NU-Cl
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 10 Oct 2013 05:10:45 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of taplink.co
designates 50.117.27.232 as permitted sender)
client-ip=50.117.27.232; envelope-from=jeremy@taplink.co;
helo=mail.taplink.co;
Received: from mail.taplink.co ([50.117.27.232])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with smtp (Exim 4.76)
id 1VU8WK-0008LS-Gz for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Thu, 10 Oct 2013 05:10:45 +0000
Received: from laptop-air ([192.168.168.135]) by mail.taplink.co ;
Wed, 9 Oct 2013 21:11:57 -0700
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=----------R7jdScXRqxdHKzY4Fcf7Rp
To: "Bitcoin Dev" <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
References: <CAEz79PrCSjSV=FcSMyYtNip8Jg8oa8nMaHbqKNKKyoB-NEqRDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2013 21:10:09 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: "Jeremy Spilman" <jeremy@taplink.co>
Organization: TapLink
Message-ID: <op.w4p0i7a3yldrnw@laptop-air>
In-Reply-To: <CAEz79PrCSjSV=FcSMyYtNip8Jg8oa8nMaHbqKNKKyoB-NEqRDQ@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Opera Mail/1.0 (Win32)
oclient: 192.168.168.135#jeremy@taplink.co#465
X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.2 RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
0.0 NORMAL_HTTP_TO_IP URI: Uses a dotted-decimal IP address in URL
1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
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: 193.28.235.60]
X-Headers-End: 1VU8WK-0008LS-Gz
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] 0.8.5 with libsecp256k1
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 05:10:45 -0000
------------R7jdScXRqxdHKzY4Fcf7Rp
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15; format=flowed; delsp=yes
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Can this be combined with the ideas on deterministic signing to show
matching signatures with OpenSSL's implementation?
Not sure if that's worth much, since we would just be testing needles in a
very large haystack, but better than nothing?
On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 20:50:30 -0700, Warren Togami Jr. <wtogami@gmail.com>
wrote:
> https://github.com/sipa/secp256k1
> sipa's secp256k1, optimized ecdsa, significantly faster than openssl
>
> Today someone in #bitcoin-dev asked for Bitcoin 0.8.5 with sipa's
> secp256k1. Litecoin has been shipping test builds with secp256k1 for
> several months >now so it was a simple matter to throw together a branch
> of Bitcoin 0.8.5 with secp256k1.
>
> https://github.com/wtogami/bitcoin/commits/btc-0.8.5-secp256k1
> This branch should theoretically work for Linux, win32 gitian and mac
> builds. These commits are rather ugly because it was thrown together
> just to make >it build with the old 0.8 makefiles without intent for
> production code merge. cfields is working on autotoolizing it as one of
> the prerequisites prior to >inclusion into bitcoin master where it will
> be an option disabled by default.
>
> http://193.28.235.60/~warren/bitcoin-0.8.5-secp256k1/
> Untested win32 gitian build. Build your own Linux or Mac builds if you
> want to test it. Not recommended for production wallet or mining uses.
>
> Warren
------------R7jdScXRqxdHKzY4Fcf7Rp
Content-Type: multipart/related; boundary=----------R7jdScXRqxdHKz2UT0XW6U
------------R7jdScXRqxdHKz2UT0XW6U
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-15
Content-ID: <op.1381378209818.88e0c4665d6b1049@192.168.168.135>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: Quoted-Printable
<!DOCTYPE html><html><head>
<style type=3D"text/css">body { font-family:'Times New Roman'; font-size=
:13px}</style>
</head>
<body><div>Can this be combined with the ideas on deterministic signing =
to show matching signatures with OpenSSL's implementation?</div><div><br=
></div><div>Not sure if that's worth much, since we would just be testin=
g needles in a very large haystack, but better than nothing?</div><div><=
br></div><div>On Wed, 09 Oct 2013 20:50:30 -0700, Warren Togami Jr. <=
wtogami@gmail.com> wrote:<br></div><br><blockquote style=3D"margin: 0=
0 0.80ex; border-left: #0000FF 2px solid; padding-left: 1ex"><div dir=3D=
"ltr"><div><div><a href=3D"https://github.com/sipa/secp256k1">https://gi=
thub.com/sipa/secp256k1</a><br></div><div>sipa's secp256k1, optimized ec=
dsa, significantly faster than openssl</div></div><div><br></div><div>
Today someone in #bitcoin-dev asked for Bitcoin 0.8.5 with sipa's secp25=
6k1. Litecoin has been shipping test builds with secp256k1 for sev=
eral months now so it was a simple matter to throw together a branch of =
Bitcoin 0.8.5 with secp256k1.</div>
<div><br></div><a href=3D"https://github.com/wtogami/bitcoin/commits/btc=
-0.8.5-secp256k1">https://github.com/wtogami/bitcoin/commits/btc-0.8.5-s=
ecp256k1</a><div>This branch should theoretically work for Linux, win32 =
gitian and mac builds. These commits are rather ugly because it wa=
s thrown together just to make it build with the old 0.8 makefiles witho=
ut intent for production code merge. cfields is working on autotoolizing=
it as one of the prerequisites prior to inclusion into bitcoin master w=
here it will be an option disabled by default.<br>
<div><br></div><div><a href=3D"http://193.28.235.60/~warren/bitcoin-0.8.=
5-secp256k1/">http://193.28.235.60/~warren/bitcoin-0.8.5-secp256k1/</a><=
br></div><div>Untested win32 gitian build. Build your own Linux or=
Mac builds if you want to test it. Not recommended for production=
wallet or mining uses.</div>
</div><div><br></div><div>Warren</div></div>
</blockquote><br><br><br></body></html>
------------R7jdScXRqxdHKz2UT0XW6U--
------------R7jdScXRqxdHKzY4Fcf7Rp--
|
