📅 Original date posted:2017-04-07
📝 Original message:The fact that this is possible should be enough for us to implement
meassures against it.
On Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev wrote:
>
> Can you please not forget to supply us more details on the claims made regarding the reverse engineering of the Asic chip?
>
> It is absolutely crucial that we get these independently verified ASAP.
>
> Daniele
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 21:38:31 +0000
> From: Gregory Maxwell <greg at xiph.org>
> To: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org>
> Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Inhibiting a covert attack on
> the Bitcoin POW function
> Message-ID:
> <CAAS2fgSTrMjKZVpL4wRidnzTCC9O3OEF=oCnROf1pggz2cDgJA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Gregory Maxwell <greg at xiph.org> wrote:
> > each block MUST either contain a BIP-141 segwit commitment or a
> > correct WTXID commitment with ID 0xaa21a9ef.
> It was just pointed out to me that the proposed ID (which I just
> selected to be above the segwit one) collides with one chosen in
> another non-BIP proposal. This wasn't intentional, and I'll happily
> change the value when I update the document.
>
>
>
>
Emilian Ursu [ARCHIVE] /
npub1uf…qvmm6
2023-06-07 17:59:29
in reply to nevent1q…jk46
Author Public Key
npub1ufg280ccgkf5kyu3ezljrsxufun7rm8pjytst22zt84jcay8nmsqgqvmm6Published at
2023-06-07 17:59:29Event JSON
{
"id": "076ecc6633829a41eb94a82b0244a2a34d82399019093f5400ed16ea0d965c2d",
"pubkey": "e250a3bf1845934b1391c8bf21c0dc4f27e1ece1911705a94259eb2c74879ee0",
"created_at": 1686160769,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"ad36e2a7543163ffef3218fa3d55149ec67fbe14dd109a89d2940c12712bdc10",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"c1c4a8f16a4ea0ea53920a7f60bd3bb8722d8ca19a9e2cc6bae9499607744937",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"d095b8308db6dba342441a113eb30e1fc39625c0f54d4eb0c3b214d083d846a5"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2017-04-07\n📝 Original message:The fact that this is possible should be enough for us to implement \nmeassures against it.\n\nOn Fri, 7 Apr 2017, Daniele Pinna via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\n\u003e \n\u003e Can you please not forget to supply us more details on the claims made regarding the reverse engineering of the Asic chip?\n\u003e \n\u003e It is absolutely crucial that we get these independently verified ASAP.\n\u003e \n\u003e Daniele\n\u003e\n\u003e Message: 2\n\u003e Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 21:38:31 +0000\n\u003e From: Gregory Maxwell \u003cgreg at xiph.org\u003e\n\u003e To: Bitcoin Dev \u003cbitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org\u003e\n\u003e Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] BIP proposal: Inhibiting a covert attack on\n\u003e the Bitcoin POW function\n\u003e Message-ID:\n\u003e \u003cCAAS2fgSTrMjKZVpL4wRidnzTCC9O3OEF=oCnROf1pggz2cDgJA at mail.gmail.com\u003e\n\u003e Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8\n\u003e On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 9:37 PM, Gregory Maxwell \u003cgreg at xiph.org\u003e wrote:\n\u003e \u003e each block MUST either contain a BIP-141 segwit commitment or a\n\u003e \u003e correct WTXID commitment with ID 0xaa21a9ef.\n\u003e It was just pointed out to me that the proposed ID (which I just\n\u003e selected to be above the segwit one) collides with one chosen in\n\u003e another non-BIP proposal. This wasn't intentional, and I'll happily\n\u003e change the value when I update the document.\n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e \n\u003e",
"sig": "dd03f208b544fc3a84d1d3a9acf8d5051f1cd75f1e1de4e888032a9a9e7b9bd9146f840abf87dc2b22fcc81d1bb57df56bcaa258ac2a92c845aac28dece8e759"
}