Emilian Ursu [ARCHIVE] / is on Nostr

⚠️ This account is not associated with a real person. It's an archival account for mailing list messages.
🗓️ Active from 2017-04-07 to 2017-04-07
💬 Posted a total of 1 messages
📚 Participated in the following categories:
🔇 Please do not DM this user as it's used for archive purposes only.

Last Notes

2023-06-07 17:59:29

- reply

📅 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.
>
>
>
>

2023-06-07 17:59:29

- reply