📅 Original date posted:2016-04-22
📝 Original message:Am 21.04.2016 um 17:28 schrieb Eric Lombrozo:
> In practice the probability of this case triggering is on the order of
> 2^-128 or something astronomically tiny. I've been using BIP32 for a few
> years already as have many others...I don't think we've ever had to
> handle this case. Justifiably, many app developers feel like the
> additional complexity of properly handling this case is not worth the
> effort.
>
> Having said that, if the handling of this case is simple to implement
> and easy to isolate in the program flow, I am in favor of doing
> something along the lines of what you propose.
>
Yes, the idea is to handle the problem in the library so that app
developers don't have to handle the case of missing addresses or just
ignore the problem. It also doesn't add much complexity to the library
as the current implementations already test for invalid keys. The
library would then just retry instead of returning an error (that most
app developers would then ignore).
Jochen
Jochen Hoenicke [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tu…dca6f
2023-06-07 17:50:10
in reply to nevent1q…sxcd
Author Public Key
npub1tue9u2scw5pe77vn4fz0464zz0387gm0zwy2zjhqg2yap36zhj2s4dca6fPublished at
2023-06-07 17:50:10Event JSON
{
"id": "9e02cd4e90610698c69a98fc7d1c76f4bb876d21ab4403201c7e8c46ed7bc6f7",
"pubkey": "5f325e2a1875039f7993aa44faeaa213e27f236f1388a14ae04289d0c742bc95",
"created_at": 1686160210,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"7a09f5b1650d8bf91dee85a09eb46eb6358130e456757f2a5ef707d77b99ebe5",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"2c59c47f567f475dd4d6c0af52cab40faa3ecda15fcd59d9fd39ececc71a8622",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"7631397e469f47f3535567311f5f7c17129e0ff2cb253df015e3d92ddfd92c63"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2016-04-22\n📝 Original message:Am 21.04.2016 um 17:28 schrieb Eric Lombrozo:\n\u003e In practice the probability of this case triggering is on the order of\n\u003e 2^-128 or something astronomically tiny. I've been using BIP32 for a few\n\u003e years already as have many others...I don't think we've ever had to\n\u003e handle this case. Justifiably, many app developers feel like the\n\u003e additional complexity of properly handling this case is not worth the\n\u003e effort.\n\u003e \n\u003e Having said that, if the handling of this case is simple to implement\n\u003e and easy to isolate in the program flow, I am in favor of doing\n\u003e something along the lines of what you propose.\n\u003e \n\nYes, the idea is to handle the problem in the library so that app\ndevelopers don't have to handle the case of missing addresses or just\nignore the problem. It also doesn't add much complexity to the library\nas the current implementations already test for invalid keys. The\nlibrary would then just retry instead of returning an error (that most\napp developers would then ignore).\n\n Jochen",
"sig": "235ed8a9d3f7fb12f01b526a0c603da7080108d174e6b271b7eac2717b230a7fda9d5c161e81fd9cbf61931950655fb07ad4953a8a0b64c6a5fe0f1e239af024"
}