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
|
Return-Path: <nbvfour@gmail.com>
Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org
[172.17.192.35])
by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C03FEA87
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:54:01 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42])
by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1182014D
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:54:00 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v77so6156067wmv.0
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:54:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
:subject:to; bh=wDX7tgAp6zWFAlTlH2YwuHSDR7Ow4xYwF7+n216n6jc=;
b=CWIrKy9kRg2BsDe4ycZRvKDno8KxefwhXb+0KRIceVtfBwLg+/P69gCF1Fr05s7glX
VwgX+6OYvd99uQ49ok/g/XYbccZpjqS3uIddyD7TSmrGEL1zhYMZ4VJVZknDioO65lLg
cs0Tvqqqy53VOs53Jm+3UKllNuVWn0wa7oph3D1HidK2RAHBs0MkxD1TFKA4eaA+Msuh
11rUwcw445vVsGyirsZaps2mmB7g4yhxjY1QuIUG5SBVnX4DJD06U/fPwLRmW+wXPvfj
sGdmqnx1plagQoq6zyShBkPUtcZTk60CDRte4RRGGouI4RQ+Mt+4sKnUeND3AHpG0WGM
TRtQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
:date:message-id:subject:to;
bh=wDX7tgAp6zWFAlTlH2YwuHSDR7Ow4xYwF7+n216n6jc=;
b=Yk5N4AECsevOlUaHNu7gZ+7gm5/qEQIuNQAi8rvxinBfmieNsuhohivhvVwOXz32SS
ArCyo/ffH8rbO24bweyzYEJMOC5+tQXpOs6KuErkVyU62H0CNrHvC1HyolRlsrBjiR2o
RAho8BzrnkBqjU6oVTp0QzsDQFg5aMZT5PdPIztNyTwplBkg926R/eeFWjIbq5Q3zmjY
qoxhXolxXoahcX6bjjxhR8gq2SLL2bNMFqaoDr+g996100M8I4Ol7oirD2K411ZEzToy
0AWbxp4gkiRMjZq8pXFzIc9tktxLDpBi6wEWqfwT2Mn67pedFw6NPJ5cGZ8lFlHkd3wU
Owog==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kf2Bc+gwy3LHs3tdpluDh1POFPsYrTsd76kpMkueiebjnji0lAqELgih4rxBcI/uQ8XXQ+S+4dpRWS6A==
X-Received: by 10.28.196.2 with SMTP id u2mr3621111wmf.109.1487872439621; Thu,
23 Feb 2017 09:53:59 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: nbvfour@gmail.com
Received: by 10.223.163.202 with HTTP; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:53:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20170223011506.GC905@savin.petertodd.org>
References: <20170223011506.GC905@savin.petertodd.org>
From: Chris Priest <cp368202@ohiou.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 09:53:58 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: TltCXWU9e5Vhu7PjDBydt3GjoeI
Message-ID: <CAAcC9ys5sUxVfOjogFiF3gzk51D_L=QQkOYevTH=qbh_RkA3Hw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Peter Todd <pete@petertodd.org>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,
DKIM_VALID, FREEMAIL_FROM,
RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on
smtp1.linux-foundation.org
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:55:18 +0000
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] A Better MMR Definition
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:54:01 -0000
On 2/22/17, Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev
<bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Reposting something that came up recently in a private discussion with some
> academics:
>
> Concretely, let's define a prunable MMR with the following grammar. This
> definition is an improvement on whats in the python-proofmarshal by
> committing
> to the number of items in the tree implicitly; an obvious max-log2(n)-sized
> proof-of-tree-size can be obtained by following the right-most nodes:
>
> Maybe(T) := UNPRUNED <T> | PRUNED <Commitment(T)>
>
> FullNode(0) := <Value>
> FullNode(n) := <Maybe(FullNode(n-1)> <Maybe(FullNode(n-1))>
>
> PartialNode(0) := SOME <FullNode(0)> | NONE
> PartialNode(n) := <Maybe(FullNode(n-1))> <Maybe(PartialNode(n-1))>
>
> MMR := FULL <N> <FullNode(n)> | PARTIAL <N> <PartialNode(n)>
>
> Basically we define it in four parts. First we define Maybe(T) to represent
> pruned and unpruned (hash only) data. Secondly we define full nodes within
> 2^n
> sized trees. Third we define partial nodes. And finally we define the MMR
> itself as being either a full or partial node.
>
> First of all, with pruning we can define a rule that if any operation
> (other
> than checking commitment hashes) attempts to access pruned data, it should
> immediately fail. In particular, no operation should be able to determine
> if
> data is or isn't pruned. Equally, note how an implementation can keep track
> of
> what data was accessed during any given operation, and prune the rest,
> which
> means a proof is just the parts of the data structure accessed during one
> or
> more operations.
>
> With that, notice how proving the soundness of the proofs becomes trivial:
> if
> validation is deterministic, it is obviously impossible to construct two
> different proofs that prove contradictory statements, because a proof is
> simply
> part of the data structure itself. Contradiction would imply that the two
> proofs are different, but that's easily rejected by simply checking the hash
> of
> the data.
>
> --
> https://petertodd.org 'peter'[:-1]@petertodd.org
>
What problem does this try to solve, and what does it have to do with bitcoin?
|
