š
Original date posted:2015-01-22
š Original message:.Hi there. Thank you for your work on this.
I've looked over https://gist.github.com/sipa/5d12c343746dad376c80 and
https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/bipstrictder . I didn't
actually audit the included reference implementation of
IsValidSignatureEncoding(), and I didn't check whether the test
vectors in https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/f94e806f8bfa007a3de4b45fa3c9860f2747e427
exercise all of the branches that are changed by this patch.
I have the following comments:
* It seems like a good idea to do this.
* I don't see any problem with using the upgrade mechanism from BIP 34
for this. It's cool! I'm happy that such a mechanism seems to work in
practice.
* Should the bipstrictder give a rationale or link to why accept the
0-length sig as correctly-encoded-but-invalid? I guess the rationale
is an efficiency issue as described in the log entry for
https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/041f1e3597812c250ebedbd8f4ef1565591d2c34
.
* Does this mean there are still multiple ways to encode a correctly
encoded but invalid signature, one of which is the 0-length string?
Would it make sense for this change to also treat any *other*
correctly-encoded-but-invalid sig (besides the 0-length string) as
incorrectly-encoded? Did I just step in some BIP62?
* It would be good to verify that all the branches of the new
IsDERSignature() from
https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/0c427135151a6bed657438ffb2e670be84eb3642
are tested by the test vectors in
https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/f94e806f8bfa007a3de4b45fa3c9860f2747e427
. Eyeballing it, there are about 20 branches touched by the patch, and
about 24 new test vectors.
* It would be good to finish the TODOs in
https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/b7986119a5d41337fea1e83804ed6223438158ec
so that it was actually testing the upgrade behavior.
* missing comment:
https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/e186f6a80161f9fa45fbced82ab1d22f081b942c#commitcomment-9406643
Okay, that's all I've got. Hope it helps! Thanks again for your good work!
Regards,
Zooko
Zooko Wilcox-OHearn [ARCHIVE] /
npub1z4ā¦684vc
2023-06-07 15:28:57
in reply to nevent1qā¦40tm
Author Public Key
npub1z4nwmaam6z2a4mszqjl2fh0g402xfsnsehcctnxrr62mqa9agc9sv684vcPublished at
2023-06-07 15:28:57Event JSON
{
"id": "37cca860ec824807fbc3c4332c3298a7c15b9ad74874c5353c218ccca8d0ff2f",
"pubkey": "1566edf7bbd095daee0204bea4dde8abd464c270cdf185ccc31e95b074bd460b",
"created_at": 1686151737,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"43498997aaf69cc28c108f60f2a0a9a1eeab544cf4e7f9ece35a133ac15cb4c1",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"df194c666af3514e79ab8cc59090fbbc2804883f4c257928f37418d246c526b4",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"4aa6cf9aa5c8e98f401dac603c6a10207509b6a07317676e9d6615f3d7103d73"
]
],
"content": "š
Original date posted:2015-01-22\nš Original message:.Hi there. Thank you for your work on this.\n\nI've looked over https://gist.github.com/sipa/5d12c343746dad376c80 and\nhttps://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/bipstrictder . I didn't\nactually audit the included reference implementation of\nIsValidSignatureEncoding(), and I didn't check whether the test\nvectors in https://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/f94e806f8bfa007a3de4b45fa3c9860f2747e427\nexercise all of the branches that are changed by this patch.\n\nI have the following comments:\n\n* It seems like a good idea to do this.\n\n* I don't see any problem with using the upgrade mechanism from BIP 34\nfor this. It's cool! I'm happy that such a mechanism seems to work in\npractice.\n\n* Should the bipstrictder give a rationale or link to why accept the\n0-length sig as correctly-encoded-but-invalid? I guess the rationale\nis an efficiency issue as described in the log entry for\nhttps://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/041f1e3597812c250ebedbd8f4ef1565591d2c34\n.\n\n* Does this mean there are still multiple ways to encode a correctly\nencoded but invalid signature, one of which is the 0-length string?\nWould it make sense for this change to also treat any *other*\ncorrectly-encoded-but-invalid sig (besides the 0-length string) as\nincorrectly-encoded? Did I just step in some BIP62?\n\n* It would be good to verify that all the branches of the new\nIsDERSignature() from\nhttps://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/0c427135151a6bed657438ffb2e670be84eb3642\nare tested by the test vectors in\nhttps://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/f94e806f8bfa007a3de4b45fa3c9860f2747e427\n. Eyeballing it, there are about 20 branches touched by the patch, and\nabout 24 new test vectors.\n\n* It would be good to finish the TODOs in\nhttps://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/b7986119a5d41337fea1e83804ed6223438158ec\nso that it was actually testing the upgrade behavior.\n\n* missing comment:\nhttps://github.com/sipa/bitcoin/commit/e186f6a80161f9fa45fbced82ab1d22f081b942c#commitcomment-9406643\n\nOkay, that's all I've got. Hope it helps! Thanks again for your good work!\n\nRegards,\n\nZooko",
"sig": "3da7dbfab11c33235681a852a5c353ecd847198fe9506b70f0c64fb362f3bc70631acc2b9886eac37c5ae14a528796e80db8de0e5129fc25b987a8e9a2a3fa61"
}