From: Andrew Poelstra <apoelstra@wpsoftware•net>
To: Anthony Towns <aj@erisian•com.au>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Soft-forks and schnorr signature aggregation
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 12:45:21 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180321124521.GI9082@boulet.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180321040618.GA4494@erisian.com.au>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1436 bytes --]
On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 02:06:18PM +1000, Anthony Towns via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
> That leads me to think that interactive signature aggregation is going to
> take a lot of time and work, and it would make sense to do a v1-upgrade
> that's "just" Schnorr (and taproot and MAST and re-enabling opcodes and
> ...) in the meantime. YMMV.
>
Unfortunately I agree. Another complication with aggregate signatures is
that they complicate blind signature protocols such as [1]. In particular
they break the assumption "one signature can spend at most one UTXO"
meaning that a blind signer cannot tell how many coins they're authorizing
with a given signature, even if they've ensured that the key they're using
only controls UTXOs of a fixed value.
This seems solvable with creative use of ZKPs, but the fact that it's even
a problem caught me off guard, and makes me think that signature aggregation
is much harder to think about than e.g. Taproot which does not change
signature semantics at all.
Andrew
[1] https://github.com/jonasnick/scriptless-scripts/blob/blind-swaps/md/partially-blind-swap.md
--
Andrew Poelstra
Mathematics Department, Blockstream
Email: apoelstra at wpsoftware.net
Web: https://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
"A goose alone, I suppose, can know the loneliness of geese
who can never find their peace,
whether north or south or west or east"
--Joanna Newsom
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 455 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-03-21 12:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-03-21 4:06 Anthony Towns
2018-03-21 7:53 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-03-21 11:21 ` Anthony Towns
2018-03-21 23:28 ` ZmnSCPxj
2018-03-21 12:45 ` Andrew Poelstra [this message]
2018-03-22 0:47 Bram Cohen
2018-03-27 6:34 ` Anthony Towns
2018-03-28 3:19 ` Bram Cohen
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180321124521.GI9082@boulet.lan \
--to=apoelstra@wpsoftware$(echo .)net \
--cc=aj@erisian$(echo .)com.au \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox