mirrors/bitcoin-bips
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/bitcoin/bips.git synced 2025-02-26 00:14:27 +01:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Merge pull request #150 from stefanwouldgo/patch-1

Browse source 
grammar typo fix: inserted "be"
This commit is contained in:
Pieter Wuille 2019-11-26 06:42:10 -08:00 • committed by GitHub
commit 9648889b4f
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
bip-schnorr.mediawiki
View file

@ -60,7 +60,7 @@ We choose the ''R''-option to support batch verification.
To protect against these attacks, we choose ''key prefixed''<ref>A limitation of committing to the public key (rather than to a short hash of it, or not at all) is that it removes the ability for public key recovery or verifying signatures against a short public key hash. These constructions are generally incompatible with batch verification.</ref> Schnorr signatures; changing the equation to ''s⋅G = R + hash(R || P || m)⋅P''. [https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/1135.pdf It can be shown] that key prefixing protects against related-key attacks with additive tweaks. In general, key prefixing increases robustness in multi-user settings, e.g., it seems to be a requirement for proving the MuSig multisignature scheme secure (see Applications below).
We note that key prefixing is not strictly necessary for transaction signatures as used in Bitcoin currently, because signed transactions indirectly commit to the public keys already, i.e., ''m'' contains a commitment to ''pk''. However, this indirect commitment should not relied upon because it may change with proposals such as SIGHASH_NOINPUT ([https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0118.mediawiki BIP118]), and would render the signature scheme unsuitable for other purposes than signing transactions, e.g., [https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#signmessage signing ordinary messages].
We note that key prefixing is not strictly necessary for transaction signatures as used in Bitcoin currently, because signed transactions indirectly commit to the public keys already, i.e., ''m'' contains a commitment to ''pk''. However, this indirect commitment should not be relied upon because it may change with proposals such as SIGHASH_NOINPUT ([https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0118.mediawiki BIP118]), and would render the signature scheme unsuitable for other purposes than signing transactions, e.g., [https://bitcoin.org/en/developer-reference#signmessage signing ordinary messages].
'''Encoding R and public key point P''' There exist several possibilities for encoding elliptic curve points:
# Encoding the full X and Y coordinates of ''P'' and ''R'', resulting in a 64-byte public key and a 96-byte signature.