š
Original date posted:2017-09-17
š Original message:On 17.09.2017 04:29, Pieter Wuille wrote:
>
> This has been a low-priority thing for me, though, and the computation work
> to find a good checksum is significant.
>
Thanks for the info. I guess this means that a bech32 format for private
keys is not going to happen soon. Even if such a format was available,
the issue would remain for segwit-in-p2sh addresses, which use base58.
The ambiguity of the WIF format is currently holding me from releasing a
segwit-capable version of Electrum. I believe it is not acceptable to
use the current WIF format with segwit scripts; that would just create
technological debt, forcing wallets to try all possible scripts. There
is a good reason why WIF adds a 0x01 byte for compressed pubkeys; it
makes it unambiguous.
I see only two options:
1. Disable private keys export in Electrum Segwit wallets, until a
common WIF extension has been agreed on.
2. Define my own WIF extension for Electrum, and go ahead with it.
Defining my own format does make sense for the xpub/xprv format, because
Electrum users need to share master public keys across Electrum wallets.
It makes much less sense for WIF, though, because WIF is mostly used to
import/sweep keys from other wallets.
I would love to know what other wallet developers are going to do,
especially Core. Are you going to export private keys used in segwit
scripts in the current WIF format?
Thomas Voegtlin [ARCHIVE] /
npub10fā¦7ej47
2023-06-07 18:06:06
in reply to nevent1qā¦k3l5
Author Public Key
npub10f96gqrsu4qpygfgvuvzce47aavjvql703egfde0l2hua8dzpszs67ej47Published at
2023-06-07 18:06:06Event JSON
{
"id": "fc5a641a0b6c612d0218945e3c8cbab61e44549e97e42a8a1c9e7ee8f6479df7",
"pubkey": "7a4ba40070e54012212867182c66beef592603fe7c7284b72ffaafce9da20c05",
"created_at": 1686161166,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"5b6b527cea5144e7ff0ce68595e52fc472c9b15e83188a0b6a74bd11f42185fe",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"3cc308721b714ac4910d53d776d7cab86892227f86e8bcdc5fcbf13590720fe8",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2017-09-17\nš Original message:On 17.09.2017 04:29, Pieter Wuille wrote:\n\u003e \n\u003e This has been a low-priority thing for me, though, and the computation work\n\u003e to find a good checksum is significant.\n\u003e \n\nThanks for the info. I guess this means that a bech32 format for private\nkeys is not going to happen soon. Even if such a format was available,\nthe issue would remain for segwit-in-p2sh addresses, which use base58.\n\nThe ambiguity of the WIF format is currently holding me from releasing a\nsegwit-capable version of Electrum. I believe it is not acceptable to\nuse the current WIF format with segwit scripts; that would just create\ntechnological debt, forcing wallets to try all possible scripts. There\nis a good reason why WIF adds a 0x01 byte for compressed pubkeys; it\nmakes it unambiguous.\n\nI see only two options:\n 1. Disable private keys export in Electrum Segwit wallets, until a\ncommon WIF extension has been agreed on.\n 2. Define my own WIF extension for Electrum, and go ahead with it.\n\nDefining my own format does make sense for the xpub/xprv format, because\nElectrum users need to share master public keys across Electrum wallets.\nIt makes much less sense for WIF, though, because WIF is mostly used to\nimport/sweep keys from other wallets.\n\nI would love to know what other wallet developers are going to do,\nespecially Core. Are you going to export private keys used in segwit\nscripts in the current WIF format?",
"sig": "7723f689a0a1ebdcbae45f7103e75472e3320662560ef79c5c348cdd30dc6efc92612f967588e582f5dd32e9e1e5e629ccbe9b3ba44e2bf3a3be66b450a34e03"
}