📅 Original date posted:2020-03-22
📝 Original message:On Sun, 2020-03-22 at 11:30 -0400, Russell O'Connor wrote:
> Your claim is that if we don't fix the pubkey issue there is no point
> in fixing the signature issue. I disagree. While I think both
> issues need to be fully addressed, the issues around the original
> proposed non-deterministic signature scheme are far more severe. The
> proposal would move us from a deterministic scheme, where spot checks
> are possible, with all the caveats that entails, to a non-
> deterministic scheme where spot checks are impossible. My hope is
> that we can standardise a scheme that has the advantages of non-
> determinism without the threat of covert channels.
I think we agree that both issues should be addressed, and this is all
what matters in the end. Now that we have a proposal for Schnorr
signatures, it's indeed a good time to work on these issues.
Tim
Tim Ruffing [ARCHIVE] /
npub1cm…dwkls
2023-06-07 18:23:13
in reply to nevent1q…u6t0
Author Public Key
npub1cmt6gqyfw3sdngkq0wadtpe3kmgyyeld6ad0g2h5tar3kpzcrmpqddwklsPublished at
2023-06-07 18:23:13Event JSON
{
"id": "16afe94dced84ec1efb8d13ff4f784d20e93f618e00e821dfc5a8ef4ef2e885d",
"pubkey": "c6d7a400897460d9a2c07bbad58731b6d04267edd75af42af45f471b04581ec2",
"created_at": 1686162193,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"dc57ed046dd17bfbde2b48ae5c93b4197f33cb78e8d235e283ed60bfa1fc7219",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"753b629cb8b389873e366c8b6ad887d53d091930254ae3323b0c9fe4992b66e5",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"6b8e77368804013d7126ba4b77c7963bcfeff909135791531097d7a0f03ca85d"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2020-03-22\n📝 Original message:On Sun, 2020-03-22 at 11:30 -0400, Russell O'Connor wrote:\n\u003e Your claim is that if we don't fix the pubkey issue there is no point\n\u003e in fixing the signature issue. I disagree. While I think both\n\u003e issues need to be fully addressed, the issues around the original\n\u003e proposed non-deterministic signature scheme are far more severe. The\n\u003e proposal would move us from a deterministic scheme, where spot checks\n\u003e are possible, with all the caveats that entails, to a non-\n\u003e deterministic scheme where spot checks are impossible. My hope is\n\u003e that we can standardise a scheme that has the advantages of non-\n\u003e determinism without the threat of covert channels.\n\nI think we agree that both issues should be addressed, and this is all\nwhat matters in the end. Now that we have a proposal for Schnorr\nsignatures, it's indeed a good time to work on these issues.\n\nTim",
"sig": "8d19e1e378c2f12bc89c82fc7fabdbc9ca3159f473fbaeaca5c8ce808f1cbe542435190bd73fc32ba6b78bcf04c6ffefb928c8bacbbe0274da9e26fee48707b7"
}