From: Joel Kaartinen <joel.kaartinen@gmail•com>
To: bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Is this a safe thing to be doing with ECC addition? (Oracle protocol)
Date: Sat, 08 Mar 2014 12:37:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <531AF2EA.50904@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+su7OWx9jrgUJrOH=tg1968vr1G1w7yXjgaRSyYJ0zRBjwpqg@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2210 bytes --]
If both parties insist on seeing a hash of the other party's public key
before they'll show their own public key, they can be sure that the
public key is not chosen based on the public key they themselves presented.
Although, I have to wonder, why not just use multisig?
- Joel
On 08.03.2014 10:51, Edmund Edgar wrote:
> On 8 March 2014 17:10, Alan Reiner <etotheipi@gmail•com
> <mailto:etotheipi@gmail•com>> wrote:
>
>
> I create a new keypair, <c_pub> with <c_priv> which I know (it can
> be any arbitrary key pair). But I don't give you <c_pub>, I give
> you <b_pub> = <c_pub> minus <a_pub> (which I can do because I've
> seen <a_pub> before doing this).
>
> Sure, I don't know the private key for <b_pub>, but it doesn't
> matter... because what
>
> <b_pub> + <a_pub> = <c_pub> (mine)
>
> You have no way to detect this condition, because you don't know
> what c_pub/c_priv I created, so you can only detect this after
> it's too late (after I abuse the private key)
>
>
> Thanks Alan and Forrest, that makes sense. So to salvage the situation
> in the original case, we have to make sure the parties exchange their
> public keys first, before they're allowed to see the public keys
> they'll be combining them with.
>
> --
> --
> Edmund Edgar
> Founder, Social Minds Inc (KK)
> Twitter: @edmundedgar
> Linked In: edmundedgar
> Skype: edmundedgar
> http://www.socialminds.jp
>
> Reality Keys
> @realitykeys
> ed@realitykeys•com <mailto:ed@realitykeys•com>
> https://www.realitykeys.com
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Subversion Kills Productivity. Get off Subversion & Make the Move to Perforce.
> With Perforce, you get hassle-free workflows. Merge that actually works.
> Faster operations. Version large binaries. Built-in WAN optimization and the
> freedom to use Git, Perforce or both. Make the move to Perforce.
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=122218951&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bitcoin-development mailing list
> Bitcoin-development@lists•sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 4695 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-08 10:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-08 6:55 Edmund Edgar
2014-03-08 8:10 ` Alan Reiner
2014-03-08 8:51 ` Edmund Edgar
2014-03-08 10:37 ` Joel Kaartinen [this message]
2014-03-08 17:41 ` Adam Back
2014-03-08 18:15 ` Natanael
2014-03-08 23:13 ` Alan Reiner
2014-03-08 20:30 ` Alan Reiner
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2014-03-04 2:59 Edmund Edgar
2014-03-04 5:07 ` Odinn Cyberguerrilla
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=531AF2EA.50904@gmail.com \
--to=joel.kaartinen@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-development@lists$(echo .)sourceforge.net \
/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