Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
Sounds like this warrants a micro-BIP just to get everybody on the same page. On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:37 AM, Ruben de Vries ru...@blocktrail.com wrote: For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public keys. If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public keys that would make it easier for services that implement some form of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and making it possible to import keys from one service to another. I'm not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to recommend, there doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to not follow that recommendation. Ryan from BitPay broad this up before ( https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in bitcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the public key. In a short search I can't find any other library that has a sorting function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my only reference. Ruben de Vries CTO, BlockTrail -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- Jeff Garzik Bitcoin core developer and open source evangelist BitPay, Inc. https://bitpay.com/ -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
On 14/01/15 20:27, Jeffrey Paul wrote: To clarify: the raw bytes of the public key itself, not the ascii base58 representation of the pubkey hash - right? Could you give an example of two pubkeys where the following condition is met? raw(pubkey1) raw(pubkey2) and base58(pubkey1) base58(pubkey2) -- Best Regards / S pozdravom, Pavol Rusnak st...@gk2.sk -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
We in Haskoin do the same. On 14/01/15 17:39, devrandom wrote: At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys. i.e. the same as BitPay. -- Be Happy :) -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
On 20150114, at 09:39, devrandom c1.sf-bitc...@niftybox.net wrote: At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys. i.e. the same as BitPay. To clarify: the raw bytes of the public key itself, not the ascii base58 representation of the pubkey hash - right? -jp -- Jeffrey Paul EEQJ j...@eeqj.com https://eeqj.com +1-800-403-1126 (America) +1-312-361-0355 (Worldwide) 5539 AD00 DE4C 42F3 AFE1 1575 0524 43F4 DF2A 55C2 -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
I would highly recommend NOT using Base58 for anything except stuff that is to be copy/pasted by the enduser. Internally, pubkeys are DER-encoded integers. - Eric On Jan 14, 2015 2:54 PM, Jeffrey Paul j...@eeqj.com wrote: On 20150114, at 09:39, devrandom c1.sf-bitc...@niftybox.net wrote: At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys. i.e. the same as BitPay. To clarify: the raw bytes of the public key itself, not the ascii base58 representation of the pubkey hash - right? -jp -- Jeffrey Paul EEQJ j...@eeqj.com https://eeqj.com +1-800-403-1126 (America) +1-312-361-0355 (Worldwide) 5539 AD00 DE4C 42F3 AFE1 1575 0524 43F4 DF2A 55C2 -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
On Wednesday, 14 January 2015, at 3:53 pm, Eric Lombrozo wrote: Internally, pubkeys are DER-encoded integers. I thought pubkeys were represented as raw integers (i.e., they're embedded in Script as a push operation whose payload is the raw bytes of the big-endian representation of the integer). As far as I know, DER encoding is only used for signatures. Am I mistaken? -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys. i.e. the same as BitPay. On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 17:37 +0100, Ruben de Vries wrote: For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public keys. If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public keys that would make it easier for services that implement some form of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and making it possible to import keys from one service to another. I'm not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to recommend, there doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to not follow that recommendation. Ryan from BitPay broad this up before (https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in bitcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the public key. In a short search I can't find any other library that has a sorting function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my only reference. Ruben de Vries CTO, BlockTrail -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- Miron / devrandom -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions
I think everyone is pretty much following this standard now. - Eric On Jan 14, 2015 12:58 PM, devrandom c1.sf-bitc...@niftybox.net wrote: At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys. i.e. the same as BitPay. On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 17:37 +0100, Ruben de Vries wrote: For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public keys. If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public keys that would make it easier for services that implement some form of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and making it possible to import keys from one service to another. I'm not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to recommend, there doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to not follow that recommendation. Ryan from BitPay broad this up before (https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in bitcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the public key. In a short search I can't find any other library that has a sorting function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my only reference. Ruben de Vries CTO, BlockTrail -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- Miron / devrandom -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet ___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development -- New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashburn. Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant. http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet___ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
