📅 Original date posted:2015-02-02
📝 Original message:On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Gregory Maxwell <gmaxwell at gmail.com> wrote:
> So I think we should just go ahead with R/S length upper bounds as
> both IsStandard and in STRICTDER.
I would like to fix this at some point in any case.
If we want to do that, we must at least have signatures with too-long
R or S values as non-standard.
One way to do that is to just - right now - add a patch to 0.10 to
make those non-standard. This requires another validation flag, with a
bunch of switching logic.
The much simpler alternative is just adding this to BIP66's DERSIG
right now, which is a one-line change that's obviously softforking. Is
anyone opposed to doing so at this stage?
--
Pieter
Pieter Wuille [ARCHIVE] /
npub1tj…jtl6r
2023-06-07 15:29:28
in reply to nevent1q…hng8
Author Public Key
npub1tjephawh7fdf6358jufuh5eyxwauzrjqa7qn50pglee4tayc2ntqcjtl6rPublished at
2023-06-07 15:29:28Event JSON
{
"id": "89fe57cd762dce84074adeb1426130e21939e3354d9bcf766af01ede5d014e9e",
"pubkey": "5cb21bf5d7f25a9d46879713cbd32433bbc10e40ef813a3c28fe7355f49854d6",
"created_at": 1686151768,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"05e51c029a722929b5fbec075843e79ec67eca31eb13392b50cc99ca6b8aaa84",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"a23dbf6c6cc83e14cc3df4e56cc71845f611908084cfe620e83e40c06ccdd3d0"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-02-02\n📝 Original message:On Sun, Jan 25, 2015 at 6:48 AM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgmaxwell at gmail.com\u003e wrote:\n\u003e So I think we should just go ahead with R/S length upper bounds as\n\u003e both IsStandard and in STRICTDER.\n\nI would like to fix this at some point in any case.\n\nIf we want to do that, we must at least have signatures with too-long\nR or S values as non-standard.\n\nOne way to do that is to just - right now - add a patch to 0.10 to\nmake those non-standard. This requires another validation flag, with a\nbunch of switching logic.\n\nThe much simpler alternative is just adding this to BIP66's DERSIG\nright now, which is a one-line change that's obviously softforking. Is\nanyone opposed to doing so at this stage?\n\n-- \nPieter",
"sig": "92f46b7d4baa554e4c7d156616a9f5ac3b1ab62a261cdfb9a6f3172a27316130697285427aff5c7002c18fdddfd7865295ae65636c308369c95f372d74a7d105"
}