Thanks! I'd love to see this library become usable behind a command line flag or config setting. At some point we're going to want to switch to it.

I believe the main issue at the moment is the malleability issues? If so, it would seem possible to use OpenSSL to parse the signature into components and then libsecp256k1 to verify them.




On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 5:50 AM, Warren Togami Jr. <wtogami@gmail.com> wrote:
sipa's secp256k1, optimized ecdsa, significantly faster than openssl

Today someone in #bitcoin-dev asked for Bitcoin 0.8.5 with sipa's secp256k1.  Litecoin has been shipping test builds with secp256k1 for several months now so it was a simple matter to throw together a branch of Bitcoin 0.8.5 with secp256k1.

https://github.com/wtogami/bitcoin/commits/btc-0.8.5-secp256k1
This branch should theoretically work for Linux, win32 gitian and mac builds.  These commits are rather ugly because it was thrown together just to make it build with the old 0.8 makefiles without intent for production code merge. cfields is working on autotoolizing it as one of the prerequisites prior to inclusion into bitcoin master where it will be an option disabled by default.

Untested win32 gitian build.  Build your own Linux or Mac builds if you want to test it.  Not recommended for production wallet or mining uses.

Warren

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
October Webinars: Code for Performance
Free Intel webinars can help you accelerate application performance.
Explore tips for MPI, OpenMP, advanced profiling, and more. Get the most from
the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register >
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60134071&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development