--- Log opened Wed Aug 02 00:00:17 2023
00:03 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
00:15 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
00:19 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
00:26 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
00:30 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
00:48 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
00:53 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
01:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
01:20 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
01:27 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
01:31 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
01:55 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
02:00 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:13 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
02:17 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
02:30 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
02:35 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
02:35 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
02:40 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:12 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
03:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
03:28 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
03:33 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:35 -!- Guest88 [~Guest88@217.180.219.187] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
03:37 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
03:42 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
03:58 -!- xyephy [~xyephy@196.207.147.100] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
04:04 -!- Guest88 [~Guest88@217.180.219.187] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
04:16 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
04:21 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
04:30 -!- xyephy [~xyephy@196.207.147.100] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
04:34 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
04:34 -!- Guest88 [~Guest88@217.180.219.187] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
04:38 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
04:45 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
04:54 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
04:58 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
05:12 -!- jonatack1 [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
05:12 -!- jon_atack [~jonatack@user/jonatack] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
05:35 -!- Guest88 [~Guest88@217.180.219.187] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
05:40 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:40 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
05:43 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
05:43 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
06:52 -!- abubakarsadiq [uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
07:30 -!- furszy [~furszy@user/furszy] has quit [Quit: ZNC - https://znc.in]
07:32 -!- furszy [~furszy@104.128.239.93] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
07:32 -!- furszy [~furszy@104.128.239.93] has quit [Changing host]
07:32 -!- furszy [~furszy@user/furszy] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
08:57 < glozow> reminder: review club meeting in ~1hr!
09:00 -!- grettke [~grettke@065-026-198-174.biz.spectrum.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:00 < Murch> 👍️
09:02 -!- Naiyoma [~Naiyoma@197.237.122.64] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:05 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:10 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
09:14 -!- ottosch [~ottosch@37.19.199.140] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:26 -!- ottosch [~ottosch@37.19.199.140] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
09:30 -!- BrandonOdiwuor [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:31 -!- BrandonOdiwuor [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has quit [Client Quit]
09:31 -!- emjshrx [~emjshrx@49.207.192.35] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:42 -!- Naiyoma [~Naiyoma@197.237.122.64] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
09:54 -!- larryruane [sid473749@id-473749.uxbridge.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:55 -!- Pins [~Pins@179.209.140.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:55 -!- Pins [~Pins@179.209.140.115] has quit [Client Quit]
09:56 -!- ottosch [~ottosch@37.19.199.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:56 -!- Pins [~Pins@179.209.140.115] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
09:59 -!- BrandonOdiwuor [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:00 < josie> #startmeeting
10:00 < stickies-v> hi
10:00 < josie> hi! 
10:00 < Pins> hi
10:00 < Murch> Hi
10:00 < BrandonOdiwuor> Hi
10:00 < abubakarsadiq> hello
10:00 < glozow> hi
10:00 < emjshrx> hey
10:00 < larryruane> hi
10:01 < josie> we are reviewing "Silent Payments: Implement BIP352" today, with the notes here: https://bitcoincore.reviews/28122
10:01 < josie> any first timers here?
10:01 < emjshrx> me
10:01 -!- sosthene [~sosthene@176-191-246-113.abo.bbox.fr] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:01 < josie> emjshrx: welcome! 
10:01 < glozow> it's my first time at monthly pr review club :3
10:01 < josie> haha was about to say, for old-timers and newcomers alike, this is our first PR review club in the new format! 
10:02 < josie> as a reminder, we are meeting today for an hour and then meeting again tomorrow at the same time to discuss the same PR
10:02 -!- Naiyoma [~Naiyoma@197.237.122.64] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:02 < Pins> Nice
10:03 < abubakarsadiq> \o/
10:03 -!- drusilla [uid607105@id-607105.helmsley.irccloud.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:03 < josie> lets get started! did you get a chance to read the BIP? if so, can you summarize it in a sentence or two, or mention a part that stood out to you?
10:04 -!- Guest98 [~Guest28@50-247-129-189-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:04 < Murch> Silent Payments describes a static address scheme where the transaction itself provides sufficient information for the recipient to recognize that they got paid without revealing to any uninvolved parties that a silent payment has occurred. This is achieved by creating a unique recipient output script from the recipient’s static address and the public keys used in the spending inputs.
10:04 < BrandonOdiwuor> BIP 352 Provides a solution for making private payments using static addresses eliminating the need for interaction or on-chain overheads i.e notifications while preserving the privacy of both the sender and the receiver
10:05 < josie> Murch, BrandonOdiwour: nice summaries :) 
10:05 < Pins> And no interaction between the participants is needed
10:06 < Murch> And it’s basically impossible to reuse addresses :)
10:06 < larryruane> I loved how the BIP adds complexity in stages, first simple, then creating > 1 output, etc. (I got a bit lost on the scan versus spend, and the labels)
10:06 < Murch> Well, unless someone just sends to a prior address
10:07 < emjshrx> larryruane : agree
10:07 < Murch> Yeah, the BIP is very well written. Easy to digest
10:07 < sosthene> Hi, just wanted to mention that the BIP made a lot of progress as far as I'm concern, and that the way labels work today lifted the most serious worry I had about the first iteration
10:07 < josie> Much: yep! so long as the sender is following the protocol, there is no way to accidentally reuse an address 
10:08 < Murch> By the way, is it possible that the wallet would not even realize that it got paid another time to a prior output script?
10:08 < stickies-v> larryruane: the scan vs send means (I think) that, similar to the xpub setup, you want to delegate scanning for received payments to a hot machine that only has your spending pubkey and your scanning private key, which is enough to recognize payments, but not to spend them (for which you need the spending privkey too)
10:08 < sosthene> I think that to reuse an address you would need to make try very hard, almost impossible indeed
10:09 < Murch> Does the wallet keep track of the output scripts after it has found an output corresponding to one? Otherwise, it would not match the protocol, and the search process would not find it
10:09 < larryruane> stickies-v: thanks, yes, I understood the motivation, just not how it's implemented :)
10:09 < josie> sosthene: thanks for joining! the BIP has indeed changed quite a bit since the original proposal from march 2022 
10:09 < sosthene> I think if an address got reused a sp wallet will just miss it
10:09 < Murch> sosthene: Yeah, that’s my suspicion as well. josie have you considered that?
10:09 < sosthene> except if you have some kind of hybrid wallets that's doing sp on top of a most classic wallet
10:10 < Murch> That would certainly make it easy to avoid forced address reuse. You simply never notice ^^
10:10 < josie> stickies-v, larry: that's correct regarding spend and scan key. as an extra benefit, the spend and scan key also makes using labels easier
10:11 < josie> for those that read the BIP, did you also look at the python reference implementation and test vectors? Can you think of any additional test cases?
10:11 < larryruane> yes I love the python code, I've been running it in the debugger, great way to look around and see what's going on
10:11 < josie> Murch: not sure I understand your question regarding tracking an output script after it found it. Can you give an example of what you mean?
10:11 < stickies-v> it seems like the test vectors only test happy paths, are there any unhappy paths/exceptions we need to test for too? (maybe i missed it)
10:12 < dergoegge> hi
10:13 < sosthene> it means you received some funds on a regular sp scriptpubkey, and the sender keep it and send to the same script pubkey again in another transaction
10:13 < emjshrx> stickies-v : Is it that in the BIP we only need happy path testing, wheras in the PR itself you can add more coverage?
10:14 < josie> sosthene, Murch: since we are using a sha256 to ensure a unique address is created, address reuse will not happen if the sender is following the protocol. of course, nothing stops a sender from maliciously sending to an output that they sent to previously, but this is true of bitcoin in general
10:14 < ottosch> I guess I'd rather have an address reused then miss a payment
10:14 < sosthene> afaiu silent payment would miss it since it won't match at scanning time
10:15 -!- BrandonOdiwuor90 [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:15 < abubakarsadiq> Silent payments enable using single address to receive multiple payments
10:15 < brunoerg> hi
10:16 < emjshrx> sosthene: are you referring to the indexes? They are for labels if i understood correctly
10:16 < josie> sosthene, ottosch: the receiving wallet would find the initial payment when scanning. continuing to monitor that output script for additional payments can be done with any other wallet protocol, because at that point the scriptPubKey is known
10:16 < josie> stickies-v: great observation! there are a few unhappy paths I can think of that are not currently covered in the tests 
10:17 < larryruane> A basic question, `P = B + hash(a·B)·G` ... that addition, does this depend on Schnorr signatures being used? I'm unclear about how Bob creates the unlock script to spend a SP later (since the pubkey is this weird thing)
10:17 < sosthene> emjshrx I'm talking about labels :)  I'm not sure about what you call indexes
10:18 -!- BrandonOdiwuor [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
10:19 -!- BrandonOdiwuor90 is now known as BrandonOdiwuor
10:19 < sosthene> larryruane that's just adding points on the curve, `a*B` is your ECDH, hashing it gives you something you can use as a Scalar, multiplying by G gives you another point on the curve, nothing to do with Schnorr
10:20 < Murch> @josie: sorry, got called away for a moment. sosthene already explained, but I meant that tx_A sent a regular SP to Bob, and then Mallory sends to the same output script as the SP to Bob went to. Would Bob’s wallet even notice that it got paid again to a prior SP output script, when in this second transaction the output script is not a valid SP
10:20 < josie> larryruane: addition here refers to addition of points on the elliptic curve, known as the elliptic curve group operation
10:21 < larryruane> sosthene: josie: thanks .. I need to study more, i don't understand how Bob (the receipient) later spends these silent payments, but that's okay
10:22 < larryruane> one more minor comment on the python (reference.py), really cool how all the typing is done, that really helps the readability!
10:22 < Murch> @ottosch: If it’s the same sender, they should just make a new SP if they want to pay me again. If it’s someone sending a tiny amount to force address reuse, I’d rather not even see it so I don’t have to think about it
10:22 < josie> Murch: if the question is "can a silent payments wallet detect payments not sent via the silent payments protocol" I think the correct answer is "it depends" :) 
10:23 < Murch> Right, let’s not get hung up on this
10:23 < ottosch> larryruane, a.B = b.A; Bob will multiply his private key by Alice's pubkey. She did the opposite
10:23 < josie> larryruane: agree! mypy is great for improving the readibility of the code. unfortunately, that's the only thing its good at ;) 
10:25 < josie> going to move on to the next question, but feel free to keep discussing/asking questions about the BIP if we aren't ready to move on
10:25 < stickies-v> larryruane: bob would just do a keypath spend, and know how to construct the private key that's needed for the (schnorr, because we're in taproot world, but could be ECDSA in theory) signature based on his (scan, spend) private key as well as the public key of the input used in the tx
10:25 < josie> did you get a chance to review the PR for Bitcoin Core? Concept ACK, NACK, etc? what was your review approach?
10:26 < Murch> larryruane: The second part `hash(a·B)·G` is derived from the shared secret of Alice and Bob: Alice’s private key and Bob’s public key multiplied result in the same value as Bob’s private key multiplied with Alice’s public key. This is just Diffie-Hellman (a·B = b·A)
10:26 < josie> for context, this PR implements only the logic from the BIP. it doesn't actually implement sending and receiving in the wallet
10:27 < Murch> Then Alice adds Bob’s public key to it the key. This means that only Bob will be able to spend it, because he needs the corresponding private key to sign
10:27 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:27 < josie> stickies-v, larryruane: that's correct! basically, the final private key ends up being Bob's spend secret key + the shared secret from Alice doing ECDH with Bob's scan key 
10:28 < Murch> josie: I just skimmed it. Huge concept ACK on Silent Payments, but don’t have an opinion on the implementation, yet. Hope to stare at it more in the coming ten days or so
10:29 < stickies-v> yeah concept ACK on SP too, and approach-wise i like that you're implementing this first bit without the wallet, that seems to make sense at first sight
10:29 < abubakarsadiq> Concept Ack 
10:29 < emjshrx> concept ACK. just curious as to why we had to modify key_io could we bring that logic closer to silentPayments.cpp
10:30 < sosthene> I didn't reviewed it in details, I just built it and ran the tests. However I would like to ask why chose to keep the send/receive for another PR?
10:30 < BrandonOdiwuor> @josie: Tested ACK, not done manual testing
10:30 < josie> emjshrx: great question! I'm curious what everyone here thinks? does implementing stuff in key_io.cpp make sense? Why or why not?
10:31 < josie> stickies-v: yeah, breaking it up this way made it much easier to unit test
10:32 < emjshrx> josie: my reasoning was just behind reuse of this logic. This logic seems to be only needed by SP, so keeping it closer made sense.
10:33 < ottosch> A question: I see the original e-mail checked only the UTXO set to reduce scanning. Will transaction history be lost?
10:33 < josie> sosthene: great question! my main motivation was to break the original PR into smaller chunks to make it easier to review. Having a PR just for the BIP352 logic (independent of send and receive) made unit testing much easier 
10:33 < brunoerg> Concept ACK, started reviewing the code, left some comments there
10:34 < josie> sosthene: also, sending and receiving can be implemented separately. In other words, a wallet can send without needing to be able to receive. It seemed logical to then open the PRs as separate since the code allows it 
10:34 < stickies-v> ottosch: if wallets want to implement scanning the full blockchain for transaction history, i don't think anything's stopping them, scanning the UTXO set is just the minimum requirement (and probably more than enough for most use cases?)
10:35 < Murch> ottosch: If you only care to find spendable UTXOs, you can restrict your scanning to transactions with unspent P2TR outputs since you last scanned. If you want the full history, you have to scan all transactions with P2TR outputs since your wallet birthdate
10:36 < josie> emjshrx: yeah, its a good point. definitely in favor of keeping the new code contained to just silent payments, where it makes sense. for some of the cryptographic operations, though, I think it makes sense to implement on the CKey and CPubKey objects only because we don't want to pull all that cryptography code into the wallet 
10:36 < BrandonOdiwuor> ottosch scanning the UTXO set will only show the unspent transactions, but you will loose history of coins already spent
10:37 < ottosch> the actual question is how it's being or will be implemented
10:37 < emjshrx> josie: thanks! It makes sense now
10:37 < larryruane> is this the first time ECDH (or any kind of DH) is used in bitcoin, that we know of?
10:38 < josie> ottosch, BrandonOdiwour: scanning the UTXO set is an optimization for mobile clients to limit the data they need to download. transaction history can always be recovered by scanning the full chain 
10:38 < ottosch> larryruane: bip47 uses it and bip351 (not sure the latter was implemented)
10:39 < Murch> ottosch: There is no reason why not both can be implemented
10:39 < ottosch> right
10:39 < sosthene> ottosch last time I checked there was a reference implementation of BIP 351 in rust
10:39 < josie> ottosch, larryruane: correct! and also "stealth addresses", the original static address proposal for bitcoin, used ECDH. unrelated to wallets, BIP324 uses ECDH, but a modified XOnlyECDH iirc
10:40 < larryruane> josie: ottosch: +1 thanks
10:42 < josie> great segue to the next question! for ECDH, why does the PR define a new custom hash function? why not use the default hash function from libsecp256k1?
10:42 < josie> this is this the commit for the custom hash function -> https://github.com/bitcoin-core-review-club/bitcoin/commit/56882622faf469b6f948f79a69c3c8ddbde92ff8
10:42 < BrandonOdiwuor> This is due to the need for un-hashed ECDH result, the ‘custom_ecdh_hash’ function returns the serialized public key without hashing it
10:43 -!- ottosch [~ottosch@37.19.199.142] has quit [Quit: Client closed]
10:44 -!- ottosch [~ottosch@37.19.199.142] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:45 < josie> BrandonOdiwuor: yep! can you think of a reason why we would want the result to stay unhashed? 
10:45 < stickies-v> which confused me. it's called a hashing function, but the one thing it doesn't seem to do is hashing?
10:45 -!- BrandonOdiwuor76 [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:45 < abubakarsadiq> I don't understand why we need it unhashed
10:45 < Murch> josie: Why is it called “custom hash function”?
10:45 < stickies-v> (also, "custom" tends to go stale _really_ quickly, what if we need other bespoke behaviour too? custom2?)
10:46 < Murch> 👍️ What stickies-v said
10:46 < emjshrx> josie: is it so that we can check for labels later on?
10:46 < josie> Murch, stickies-v: because I'm bad at naming things :P jokes aside, I was trying to match the language in libsecp, where they say you can use the "default" hash function or pass a "custom" hash function
10:46 < abubakarsadiq> Why is it living in wallet Instead of secp256k1
10:46 < josie> abubakarsadiq: great observation! ideally, this will be moved to libsecp at some point
10:47 < sosthene> I think we don't hash it because we want to add the n counter before hashing
10:47 < glozow> maybe `not_hash_function`
10:47 < josie> glozow: haha nice 
10:48 < josie> emjshrx: not quite! labels can work with or without it being hashed in that step 
10:48 < sosthene> but frankly when I noticed it I thought we could just hash it anyway, add the counter and hash it again, so that we don't need the `this_is_not_a_hash_function` trick
10:48 -!- BrandonOdiwuor [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
10:48 < josie> sosthene: actually in the original version of the BIP, we hashed during ECDH and then again with the counter
10:49 < josie> here's a hint as to why we don't hash during the ECDH step: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/1458#pullrequestreview-1466163601
10:50 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
10:50 < josie> (click on "show resolved" for the actual discussion)
10:52 < Murch> It’s not obvious to me why the hash inside of ECDH is a problem for MuSig2 users
10:54 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
10:54 < josie> Murch: less specific to Musig2, but more generally any time the creator of the transaction does not control all the inputs. By not hashing the result during ECDH, this allows individual participants to do ECDH with just their private key, and then pass the partial ECDH along. the partial ECDH results can then be summed up , and the rest of the protocol performed (hashing with the
10:55 < josie> counter, etc)
10:55 < Murch> Aah, right
10:55 < Murch> Otherwise people would need to exchange the aggregate the private keys in order to calculate the hash
10:55 < josie> Murch: exactly! 
10:56 < Murch> which would very likely leak the private keys to the other participants (unless there is a really nifty way of aggregating them without revealing them or smth, but just not hashing is way easier)
10:56 < josie> so we've got 4 minutes left, so I think I'll wait til tomorrow to dive into the next question, because it's a fairly big one. As a reminder, we are meeting tomorrow at the same time and are going to jump right in with question 5
10:57 < josie> with the remaining 4 mins, any questions or comments about what we've discussed so far?
10:57 < emjshrx> wouldnt it be easier to just use complex scripts on the Spend key instead of Scan key
10:58 < josie> emjshrx: can you give an example of what you mean by "complex scripts" ? 
10:58 < emjshrx> musig2
10:58 < Murch> emjshrx: The problem is not the receiver, but the sender
10:59 < emjshrx> oh okay. I need to go through the PR discussion again
10:59 -!- BrandonOdiwuor76 [~BrandonOd@105.162.53.44] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
10:59 < Murch> The problem occurs in the calculation of the shared secreet
11:00 < josie> emjshrx: the spend and scan key is so that the receiver can always keep one key in cold storage. in fact, the spend key itself can be an aggregate key (musig2, FROST)
11:00 < josie> regarding the hashing and ECDH, this is on the sender side 
11:00 < Murch> which is more difficult for the sender, because they need to use all private keys from the relevant inputs
11:00 < josie> cool, we'll stop here and be back tomorrow! thanks for attending and really hope to see you all tomorrow! 
11:00 < josie> #endmeeting
11:00 < emjshrx> murch: josie: got it now thanks
11:00 < sosthene> thanks josie
11:00 < stickies-v> thanks a lot for hosting josie, loved the in-depth discussion today! 
11:00 < Pins> thanks
11:01 < stickies-v> see you tomorrow - same time at 17:00 UTC
11:01 -!- sosthene [~sosthene@176-191-246-113.abo.bbox.fr] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
11:01 -!- Pins [~Pins@179.209.140.115] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
11:01 < Murch> And the problem here in particulare was that the shared secret from ECDH got hashed before the aggregation step, so it would have meant that whoever calculates the shared secret would need all private keys from the input side
11:01 < glozow> thank you josie!
11:01 < Murch> thanks josie 
11:01 < josie> stickies-v: same! loving the new monthly format! 
11:02 -!- Naiyoma [~Naiyoma@197.237.122.64] has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
11:02 -!- emjshrx [~emjshrx@49.207.192.35] has left #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews []
11:02 -!- ottosch [~ottosch@37.19.199.142] has quit [Quit: ottosch]
11:04 < larryruane> thanks, @josie!
11:05 < abubakarsadiq> thank you Josie, and everyone
11:17 -!- ishaanam[m] [~ishaanamm@2001:470:69fc:105::2:4078] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
12:15 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
12:17 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
12:24 -!- Talkless [~Talkless@mail.dargis.net] has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
13:48 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
13:53 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:12 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
14:15 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
14:16 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:19 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
14:23 -!- drusilla [uid607105@id-607105.helmsley.irccloud.com] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
14:52 -!- abubakarsadiq [uid602234@id-602234.hampstead.irccloud.com] has quit [Quit: Connection closed for inactivity]
14:59 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
15:23 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
15:23 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
15:26 -!- b_101 [~robert@static-198-54-129-102.cust.tzulo.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
15:28 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
15:29 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
15:34 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
15:44 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
15:45 -!- b_101 [~robert@static-198-54-129-102.cust.tzulo.com] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
16:25 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:c041:923c:ced8:2340] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:42 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
16:47 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
16:52 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
16:53 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
16:56 -!- grettke [~grettke@065-026-198-174.biz.spectrum.com] has quit [Quit: grettke]
17:17 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
17:22 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:29 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
17:29 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
17:34 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
17:35 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
17:38 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
17:39 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
17:42 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
17:42 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
17:48 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
17:51 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
17:56 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
17:59 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:03 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
18:13 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:18 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
18:22 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:23 -!- grettke [~grettke@065-026-198-174.biz.spectrum.com] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:23 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
18:24 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:29 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
18:30 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:32 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:35 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
18:38 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
18:47 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:51 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
18:54 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
18:56 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
19:07 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
19:09 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
19:12 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:14 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:25 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
19:30 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
19:42 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
19:47 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
19:54 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:01 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
20:01 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:03 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:04 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:06 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:08 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:08 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:21 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:25 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:27 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:32 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:33 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:36 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:37 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
20:40 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:41 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
20:44 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
20:49 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:50 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:54 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
20:54 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:55 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
20:58 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:05 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:07 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:09 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
21:10 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:12 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
21:15 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 245 seconds]
21:21 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:29 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:30 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:31 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:33 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
21:36 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:37 -!- andrew_m_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
21:38 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:41 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
21:42 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:43 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:47 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
21:50 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
21:54 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
21:59 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:00 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:04 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
22:05 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:09 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:14 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@187.183.43.117] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
22:14 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:20 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:22 -!- xyephy [~xyephy@197.237.140.109] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:23 -!- xyephy [~xyephy@197.237.140.109] has quit [Client Quit]
22:31 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:37 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
22:39 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:43 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
22:48 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
22:53 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
22:56 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:00 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
23:05 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:09 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
23:11 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:11 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:16 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
23:21 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:30 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:35 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
23:42 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:47 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
23:56 -!- brunoerg [~brunoerg@2804:14c:3bfb:8a:4193:f38b:8d15:48b0] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
23:58 -!- andrew_mo_ [andrew_mo_@gateway/vpn/protonvpn/andrewmo/x-47904524] has joined #bitcoin-core-pr-reviews
--- Log closed Thu Aug 03 00:00:19 2023