From: Lloyd Fournier <lloyd.fourn@gmail•com>
To: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32•com>,
Bitcoin Protocol Discussion
<bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Schnorr sigs vs pairing sigs
Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2020 17:40:24 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAH5Bsr3CbG6b4tk0hkLECfg0LM38BNp7nfspLv+NbMg6f79iDg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJowKg+Sgfv-FxZ2gyYWO4HmVwVFZjpjN3RkGN4y1TJwpuLMtQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1262 bytes --]
Hi Erik,
There are a strong arguments for and against pairing based sigs in Bitcoin.
One very strong argument in favour over non-deterministic signatures like
Schnorr over BLS is it enables a kind of signature encryption called
"adaptor signatures". This construction is key to many exciting up and
coming layer 2 protocols and isn't possible unless the signature scheme
uses randomness.
self plug: I have a paper on this topic called "One-Time Verifiably
Encrypted Signatures A.K.A Adaptor Signatures"
https://github.com/LLFourn/one-time-VES/blob/master/main.pdf
LL
On Fri, Mar 6, 2020 at 6:03 AM Erik Aronesty via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> Schnorr sigs rely so heavily on the masking provided by a random
> nonce. There are so many easy ways to introduce bias (hash + modulo,
> for example).
>
> Even 2 bits of bias can result in serious attacks:
>
> https://ecc2017.cs.ru.nl/slides/ecc2017-tibouchi.pdf
>
> Maybe pairing based sigs - which are slower - might be both more
> flexible, and better suited to secure implemetnations?
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2076 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-06 6:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-05 19:01 Erik Aronesty
2020-03-06 6:40 ` Lloyd Fournier [this message]
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=CAH5Bsr3CbG6b4tk0hkLECfg0LM38BNp7nfspLv+NbMg6f79iDg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=lloyd.fourn@gmail$(echo .)com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=erik@q32$(echo .)com \
/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