This paper was just posted on reddit that describes how an attacker can
de-anonymize clients on the bitcoin network. It mentions that the core devs
were contacted prior to publication. I was just wondering, how many of these
issues have already been addressed?
Paper (University of Luxembourg):
FYI,
https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/310.pdf
jp
--
BPM Camp - Free Virtual Workshop May 6th at 10am PDT/1PM EDT
Develop your own process in accordance with the BPMN 2 standard
Learn Process modeling best practices with Boni
Ok, false alarm. :)
Sorry for the spam.
On Apr 07, 2015, at 02:37 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:32 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman
wrote:
https://eprint.iacr.org/2015/310.pdf
http://www.reddit.com/r/Bitcoin/comments/31rcuo/new_algorithm_for_the_discrete_logarithm_problem
the moment. This is definitely necessary and a great approach to combine BIP0038 and BIP0032. Do you have reference code?On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 10:46 AM, Jean-Paul Kogelman <jeanpaulkogel...@me.com> wrote:Hi everyone,I'm looking for feedback on the proposal below.Kind regards,Jean-Paul-
the master seed with the hashed passphrase of equal length to the seed?Does this basically serve the fucntion of an IV?Do you really need this since the master seed must be high entropy random bytes in the first place?Thanks,--JeremyOn Fri, 19 Jul 2013 10:46:44 -0700, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:Hi ev
Hi everyone,I'm looking for feedback on the proposal below.Kind regards,Jean-Paul---BIP: Title: Base58 encoded HD Wallet master seed with optional encryptionAuthor: Jean-Paul KogelmanStatus: DraftType: InformationalCreated: 17-07-2013AbstractThis proposal describes a method for encoding and optiona
Hi Mike,
I had a similar request on the forums. I suggested adding either a 2 byte
'weeks since genesis' or 'months since genesis', but starting from spec birth
works too. Would either of those work for you?
jp
On Jul 22, 2013, at 6:14 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:
> This isn't usable for SPV walle
I added a 2 byte 'weeks since 2013-01-01' field and updated the prefixes, ranges and test vectors.The updated proposal lives here:https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=258678Cheers,jpOn Jul 22, 2013, at 06:14 AM, Mike Hearn wrote:This isn't usable for SPV wallets unless it has a birthday in it.
On 2013-10-19, at 1:40 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
>
> "I wasn't even allowed to edit the wiki"
>
> I'm confused about this, if he's referring to en.bitcoin.it. Editing
> it is open to anyone who is willing to pay the 0.01
> (https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BitcoinPayment) anti-spam fee. This isn't
>
I submitted the proposal to the mailing list on July 19, 2003.
On 2013-10-19, at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
> On Saturday, October 19, 2013 9:16:24 PM Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
>> I have a question regarding this part. I wrote a BIP for base 58 encoding /
>> encryption of BIP 32
On 2013-10-19, at 4:21 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
> I submitted the proposal to the mailing list on July 19, 2003.
That would be 2013. sorry.
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGM
On 2013-10-19, at 4:20 PM, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 3:29 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:
>> See BIP 1 for the process.. proposals go to this mailing list first.
>
> FWIW, he did post to the mailing list and he got an underwhelming response:
>
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/fo
>> Having it on the BIP page doesn't make it any more official, I agree, but it
>> does increase its exposure and will hopefully spark some more discussion.
>
> Having it on the BIP page *does* make it more official, at least the way
> we've been using the BIP page, which is to filter out the pr
I was wondering, would it be possible to create an area where proposals like
your NODE_BLOOM and BIP 38 could live?
On 2013-10-20, at 11:25 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 08:27:47PM -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:
>> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 6:43 PM, Peter Todd wrote:
>>> FWIW I th
Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:40:26PM -0700, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
>>
>> I was wondering, would it be possible to create an area where proposals like
>> your NODE_BLOOM and BIP 38 could live?
>
> Sure, I think Jeff mentioned the idea of a specific drafts/ directory
> within
The list comes from BIP 1.
On 2013-10-21, at 12:03 AM, Martin Sustrik wrote:
> On 21/10/13 08:52, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
>> How about putting them into sub directories that map onto the status of the
>> BIP?
>>
>> Reading BIP 1, that would make:
>>
On 2013-10-21, at 2:44 AM, Arto Bendiken wrote:
>
> Indeed. The BIP analogs that immediately come to mind would be the
> enhancement proposal processes for Python, XMPP, and BitTorrent:
Bitcoin's BIP process is directly based off of Python's PEP process.
Quote from BIP 1, History:
This docu
I have some more questions.1) Should the protocol specification page also be codified into BIP(s)?2) Should the current wiki pages be taken down / forwarded to the git repo or be auto updated from the git repo?3) Even though the information in BIP 50 is valuable, should it really be considered a BI
> I wanted to have a look at how the whole Bitcoin thing works recently.
> Being a distributed application, I've searched for the protocol spec.
> What I found were two wiki pages (Protocol & ProtocolRules) that looked
> more like notes someone wrote down while implementing the application.
>
Would it make sense to use either fixed length strings or maybe even enums?On Oct 25, 2013, at 05:34 PM, Gavin Andresen wrote:Mike Hearn has been lobbying for an "error" message in the Bitcoin p2p protocol for years (at least since the "ban peers if they send us garbage" denial-of-service mitigati
On Nov 15, 2013, at 05:10 PM, Luke-Jr wrote:On Saturday, November 16, 2013 12:41:56 AM Drak wrote:So "a payment clears after one confirmation, but you might want to waituntil the payment has been confirmed n times".Then at least you are not using the same word for two different meaningsand you're
I've made no changes since the last time I've mentioned it here on the list
(when the BIP procedures were being discussed).
The last changes are:
01-10-2013 - Expanded the salt to be prefix + date + checksum and renamed
'master seed' to 'root key'.
24-07-2013 - Added user selectable KDF + para
Merry Christmas everyone!
I've updated the proposal.
I've changed the checksum to be a double SHA256 of the private key instead of
the public address string and I've added support for 3rd party KDF computation.
The full proposal with updated test vectors lives here:
https://bitcointalk.org/ind
Hi all,
We've been having a heated discussion on HD wallet import strategies on
bitcointalk and I was wondering what the people on bitcoin-dev had to say about
the subject.
So I have a few questions and would love to hear your thoughts on them:
1) What information do you consider absolutely e
> On Mar 5, 2014, at 8:56 PM, Pieter Wuille wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Mike Hearn wrote:
>> I am not currently aware of any efforts to make OpenSSL's secp256k1
>> implementation completely side channel free in all aspects. Also,
>> unfortunately many people have reimplemented
Just to add some more numbers, in Canada, the maximum is $50 and I've used it
for transactions of $5, even less.
I use it every day to pay for breakfast and it works through my wallet, even
with multiple NFC enabled cards in there (though not overlapping). The
experience is quite smooth; simpl
On Mar 12, 2014, at 6:11 AM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:
> On 03/12/2014 04:17 AM, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:
>> We've been hard at work updating the spec to include features that were
>> requested. We've removed the Scrypt dependency that was present in the
>> initia
On Mar 12, 2014, at 08:55 AM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:On 03/12/2014 04:45 PM, Jean-Paul Kogelman wrote:Yes I am. There are some differences between BIP 39 and my proposal though.- BIP 39 offers an easy list of words, no gnarly string of case sensitive letters and numbers. Which is better IMO. I can&#
On Mar 12, 2014, at 09:49 AM, Gary Rowe wrote:Jean-Paul, it may be worth noting that the BIP39 word list is integrated into Bitcoinj so will likely become the de facto standard for Android, Trezor web and several desktop wallets. Anyone deviating from that word list would likely find themselves in
On Mar 12, 2014, at 01:24 PM, Pavol Rusnak wrote:On 03/12/2014 09:10 PM, William Yager wrote:implement this is to allow semi-trusted devices (like desktop PCs) to doall the "heavy lifting". The way the spec is defined, it is easy to have amore powerful device do all the tough key stretching work w
Isn't that just conceding that p2p protocol A is better than p2p protocol B?
Can't Bitcoin Core's block fetching be improved to get similar performance as a
torrent + import?
Currently it's hard to go wide on data fetching because headers first is still
pretty 'beefy'. The headers can be compre
31 matches
Mail list logo
