BIP for Legacy Sign Verify functions
5 messages, 21 to 22 Dec 2017. Started by Dan Bryant.
Dan Bryant (2), Aymeric Vitte (2), Luke Dashjr
https://github.com/brianddk/bips/blob/legacysignverify/bip-0xyz.mediawiki
Although this is a well established functionality, it has never been published in a BIP. My proposal is simply to provide a reference point for future expansion of these capabilities into new address schemes.
Original reference thread [Sign / Verify message against SegWit P2SH addresses]
On Thursday 21 December 2017 10:26:25 PM Dan Bryant via bitcoin-dev wrote:
Quoted text (1 line)
> https://github.com/brianddk/bips/blob/legacysignverify/bip-0xyz.mediawiki
It's not even correct... Your first "verify message" step is not possible; you can't get a public key from an address.
What is actually done, is using the signature + message to perform key recovery, to extract the public key of the signer, and then hashing that and comparing it to the address provided.
Quoted text (3 lines)
> Although this is a well established functionality, it has never been > published in a BIP. My proposal is simply to provide a reference point for > future expansion of these capabilities into new address schemes.
New schemes should probably NOT be based on the current one.
Luke
Thank you... I've updated.
Quoted text (1 line)
> New schemes should probably NOT be based on the current one.
Fair enough... I still think there are those who would still like an existing sign/verify BIP to reference.
On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Luke Dashjr <luke@dashjr•org> wrote:
Quoted text (22 lines)
> On Thursday 21 December 2017 10:26:25 PM Dan Bryant via bitcoin-dev wrote: > > https://github.com/brianddk/bips/blob/legacysignverify/ > bip-0xyz.mediawiki > > It's not even correct... Your first "verify message" step is not possible; > you > can't get a public key from an address. > > What is actually done, is using the signature + message to perform key > recovery, to extract the public key of the signer, and then hashing that > and > comparing it to the address provided. > > > Although this is a well established functionality, it has never been > > published in a BIP. My proposal is simply to provide a reference point > for > > future expansion of these capabilities into new address schemes. > > New schemes should probably NOT be based on the current one. > > Luke >
Le 22/12/2017 à 00:09, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev a écrit :
Quoted text (3 lines)
> What is actually done, is using the signature + message to perform key > recovery, to extract the public key of the signer, and then hashing that and > comparing it to the address provided.
I already posted about this, then what is doing the pubkey in sigscript for standard p2pkh transactions? (this was not the case some time ago)
Scriptsig not "sigscript" below
Now you must answer this question, because this is what we call a hard fork
Le 22/12/2017 à 11:29, Aymeric Vitte a écrit :
Quoted text (8 lines)
> > Le 22/12/2017 à 00:09, Luke Dashjr via bitcoin-dev a écrit : >> What is actually done, is using the signature + message to perform key >> recovery, to extract the public key of the signer, and then hashing that and >> comparing it to the address provided. > I already posted about this, then what is doing the pubkey in sigscript > for standard p2pkh transactions? (this was not the case some time ago) >