12016-08-06T00:01:40 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
22016-08-06T00:15:09 *** hsmiths has quit IRC
32016-08-06T00:28:01 *** Alopex has quit IRC
42016-08-06T00:29:06 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52016-08-06T00:30:59 *** felipelalli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
62016-08-06T00:39:21 *** Alopex has quit IRC
72016-08-06T00:40:26 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
82016-08-06T00:45:50 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
92016-08-06T01:20:07 *** btcdrak has quit IRC
102016-08-06T01:26:06 *** Alopex has quit IRC
112016-08-06T01:26:28 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122016-08-06T01:27:11 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132016-08-06T01:27:56 *** pigeons has quit IRC
142016-08-06T01:28:03 *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
152016-08-06T01:28:28 *** pigeons is now known as Guest21622
162016-08-06T01:34:12 *** belcher has quit IRC
172016-08-06T01:37:24 *** spudowiar has quit IRC
182016-08-06T01:41:45 *** Guest21622 is now known as pigeons
192016-08-06T01:44:19 *** goregrind has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202016-08-06T01:48:34 <GitHub6> [bitcoin] Christewart opened pull request #8469: [POC] Introducing property based testing to Core (master...rapidcheck) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8469
212016-08-06T01:49:10 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
222016-08-06T02:13:33 *** pmienk has quit IRC
232016-08-06T02:17:12 *** Alopex has quit IRC
242016-08-06T02:18:17 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
252016-08-06T02:28:22 *** pmienk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262016-08-06T02:29:06 *** Alopex has quit IRC
272016-08-06T02:30:11 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
282016-08-06T02:31:15 *** pigeons has quit IRC
292016-08-06T02:38:07 *** dvsdude has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
302016-08-06T02:48:58 *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312016-08-06T02:49:22 *** pigeons is now known as Guest80390
322016-08-06T02:52:47 *** Guest80390 is now known as pigeons
332016-08-06T02:53:16 *** Alopex has quit IRC
342016-08-06T02:54:21 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352016-08-06T03:07:26 *** fengling has quit IRC
362016-08-06T03:08:12 *** fengling has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372016-08-06T03:08:49 <jeremyrubin> How do I use travis without pushing to my PR?
382016-08-06T03:09:19 <jeremyrubin> I'd like to confirm what I think is causing some build fails without having to push
392016-08-06T03:09:36 <jeremyrubin> testing locally is a bit mroe difficult
402016-08-06T03:10:03 *** pigeons has quit IRC
412016-08-06T03:10:28 *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422016-08-06T03:11:25 *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
432016-08-06T03:11:49 *** pigeons is now known as Guest19508
442016-08-06T03:12:43 *** FNinTak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452016-08-06T03:20:01 *** Alopex has quit IRC
462016-08-06T03:21:06 *** Alopex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472016-08-06T03:24:07 *** Guest19508 has quit IRC
482016-08-06T03:25:40 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
492016-08-06T03:25:59 *** btcdrak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
502016-08-06T03:29:28 *** pigeons has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
512016-08-06T03:29:52 *** pigeons is now known as Guest79503
522016-08-06T03:36:34 <jeremyrubin> ah i guess I hadn't looked at the pull_tester before... should be resolved.
532016-08-06T03:38:35 *** anu0 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
542016-08-06T03:42:43 <sipa> jeremyrubin: you can't run the tests locally?
552016-08-06T03:54:23 *** blur3d has quit IRC
562016-08-06T04:00:04 *** aalex has quit IRC
572016-08-06T04:03:29 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
582016-08-06T04:06:24 *** sonlin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592016-08-06T04:07:27 <sonlin> Thoughts on implementing the dev subsidy feature?
602016-08-06T04:07:50 <sipa> what feature?
612016-08-06T04:08:29 <sonlin> It takes for example 20% of block reward and fees and distributes it to devs.
622016-08-06T04:09:12 *** aalex has quit IRC
632016-08-06T04:09:13 <sonlin> The exact % can be changed.
642016-08-06T04:09:22 <sipa> why would anyone accept that?
652016-08-06T04:09:36 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662016-08-06T04:10:02 <sipa> especially with the current developers not asking for such a thing
672016-08-06T04:10:06 <sonlin> It seems like a good way to distribute coins instead of just pow as it is currently.
682016-08-06T04:10:28 <sipa> it requires a centralized development team
692016-08-06T04:10:38 <sipa> whose identity is hardcoded in the protocol
702016-08-06T04:10:54 <sonlin> Right now there is no direct reward for developing.
712016-08-06T04:11:08 <sipa> it seems to work fine without
722016-08-06T04:11:11 <sonlin> Once there is then there will be competition between developers to do things better.
732016-08-06T04:11:15 <gmaxwell> the reward is that we get to argue with ignorant people on the internet.
742016-08-06T04:11:47 <sipa> sonlin: no, there would be an incentive for developers to start pumping the price and do marketing
752016-08-06T04:11:53 <sonlin> Dsd in my opinion could fix a lot of this politics bs in the dev space.
762016-08-06T04:12:13 <sipa> security and features don't drive the price... empty promises do
772016-08-06T04:12:27 *** dvsdude has left #bitcoin-core-dev
782016-08-06T04:12:31 <gmaxwell> sonlin: by having protocol hardcoded developers... you think that would fix a lot of politics?
792016-08-06T04:13:05 <kanzure> also see other weird problems with transaction fees from wallets and wallet developers
802016-08-06T04:13:06 <sonlin> Developers wouldn't necessarily be hard coded.
812016-08-06T04:13:15 <sonlin> And it's funny you brought that up.
822016-08-06T04:13:19 <sipa> sonlin: then who has the right to update the list of developers?
832016-08-06T04:13:27 *** gmaxwell has left #bitcoin-core-dev
842016-08-06T04:13:33 <sipa> who get the subsidy?
852016-08-06T04:13:34 <sonlin> Because right now it's almost like devs are hardcoded in.
862016-08-06T04:13:51 <sipa> what?
872016-08-06T04:13:55 <sonlin> There is such a closed off community of devs.
882016-08-06T04:14:00 <sonlin> That pushes some other devs away.
892016-08-06T04:14:20 <sipa> how would your proposal fix that?
902016-08-06T04:14:28 <sipa> who gets to decide which developers get the money?
912016-08-06T04:15:00 <sonlin> Bitcoin holders and a combination of other methods.
922016-08-06T04:15:11 <sipa> how do bitcoin holders decide?
932016-08-06T04:15:13 <sonlin> Dsd is still being developed.
942016-08-06T04:15:21 <sipa> what is Dsd?
952016-08-06T04:15:37 <sonlin> Developer subsidy distribution
962016-08-06T04:15:45 <kanzure> how do you evaluate whether the community is closed off? have you tried to write code?
972016-08-06T04:16:10 <sipa> there have been altcoins that tried this model
982016-08-06T04:16:15 <sonlin> I currently have a team of developers writing the code.
992016-08-06T04:16:20 <sipa> it doesn't seem to work
1002016-08-06T04:16:35 <sipa> in any case, off topic for this channel
1012016-08-06T04:16:38 <kanzure> and what payments did you make to join this irc channel? it doesn't seem particularly closed to me..
1022016-08-06T04:16:41 <kanzure> ok fine
1032016-08-06T04:16:43 <sonlin> I just want bitcoin to progress.
1042016-08-06T04:17:13 <sonlin> That's why I'm going to implement this.
1052016-08-06T04:17:15 <kanzure> i think that a developer subsidy might be possible, but it will need a better idea, because existing implementations of your idea have shown the model to be fairly broken
1062016-08-06T04:17:19 <sipa> you can do so without introducing a point of centralization
1072016-08-06T04:17:19 <sonlin> It will be hard to get this implemented though.
1082016-08-06T04:17:26 <sonlin> Because I'm fairly sure no miners will allow this.
1092016-08-06T04:17:52 <sipa> i think it's a terrible idea... speaking as someone who would possibly be at the receiving end of your idea :)
1102016-08-06T04:18:41 <sipa> and we all want bitcoin to progress, but i don't think you do that by radically changing its economics
1112016-08-06T04:19:12 <sonlin> Ok 20% might be to high
1122016-08-06T04:19:16 <sonlin> But let's say 5% gos towards dsd
1132016-08-06T04:19:25 <sipa> even if it was 0.001%
1142016-08-06T04:19:34 <sonlin> That's $50k a day at current price that gos towards development.
1152016-08-06T04:19:37 <sipa> i think it's fundamentally a perversion of incentives
1162016-08-06T04:19:45 <kanzure> the funny thing is that altcoins should probably hard-code their developer subsidies to pay bitcoin developers, so that the bitcoin developers continue to work, since altcoins benefit mainly from that development activity, and that subsidy doesn't interfere with the bitcoin protocol definition. however, iirc, developers in the past have said they would not touch any of those subsidy payments anyway.
1172016-08-06T04:20:59 <sipa> feel free to discuss the idea once you have worked out the exact mechanism on the mailing list
1182016-08-06T04:21:04 <kanzure> (e.g. they wouldn't touch any of it on principle and because perversion of incentive reasons and because having someone decide where the payments go is itself contentious and difficult to solve)
1192016-08-06T04:21:08 <sipa> but i expect most developers to dislike it
1202016-08-06T04:21:33 <sipa> before you even know how users get to decide the distribution there is not much to talk about
1212016-08-06T04:22:21 <sonlin> I'm not the one actually developing it that's why.
1222016-08-06T04:22:23 <kanzure> sipa: what about altcoins distributing payments to bitcoin developers as part of their protocol definitions?
1232016-08-06T04:22:39 <kanzure> ok anyway off-topic i guess
1242016-08-06T04:23:00 <sipa> kanzure: now you give bitcoin developers an incentive to go pump those altcoins :p
1252016-08-06T04:23:04 <sipa> please, don't give them idea
1262016-08-06T04:23:04 <sonlin> But i was told by the developers that are making dsd that basically all bitcoin devs would switch over at once.
1272016-08-06T04:23:16 <sonlin> It's to good to pass up.
1282016-08-06T04:23:22 <sipa> sonlin: i believe you're misinformed
1292016-08-06T04:23:44 <sipa> also, bitcoin developers don't set the rules
1302016-08-06T04:24:01 <sonlin> I know that's the thing.
1312016-08-06T04:24:02 <kanzure> "all developers would switch over at once" would only make sense if developers were doing development for payment (and most of them are unpaid, which seems to indicate otherwise)
1322016-08-06T04:24:03 <sipa> if bitcoin core were to introduce such a rule, i hope the community would refuse to run it
1332016-08-06T04:24:21 <luke-jr> kanzure: sipa: Devcoin already did that.
1342016-08-06T04:24:43 <sipa> right, devcoin
1352016-08-06T04:25:13 <sonlin> It's human nature, developers will not refuse this subsidy.
1362016-08-06T04:25:21 <luke-jr> sonlin: Devcoin seems pretty dead.
1372016-08-06T04:25:35 <kanzure> sonlin: it seems pretty easy to me to refuse a subsidy.
1382016-08-06T04:25:54 <sipa> sonlin: as a developer, i believe it would strongly undermine trust in bitcoin as an independent decentralized currency
1392016-08-06T04:26:00 <sipa> sonlin: as such, i would oppose it
1402016-08-06T04:26:05 <sipa> even if it would pay me
1412016-08-06T04:26:07 <sonlin> That's because devcoin was an irelevent alt
1422016-08-06T04:26:41 <sonlin> It would put an end to development stagnation
1432016-08-06T04:26:52 <sipa> what?
1442016-08-06T04:26:59 <sipa> development is going faster than ever
1452016-08-06T04:27:27 <sonlin> There is to much time wasted with politics
1462016-08-06T04:27:53 <sipa> and you think adding more money to the equation would reduce politics? :o
1472016-08-06T04:27:53 <sonlin> Once there is financial incentive things will start to inovate and speed up.
1482016-08-06T04:27:57 <kanzure> they seem to be writing code instead of doing politics. this is increasingly off-topic. i think you should move to another channel to discuss this.
1492016-08-06T04:28:06 <sipa> sonlin: i think you're totally wrong
1502016-08-06T04:28:38 <sipa> sonlin: people were trying to innovate long before bitcoin had any value. increased value brought economic interest in influencing development with all associated politics
1512016-08-06T04:30:06 <sipa> anyway, this is getting far off topic
1522016-08-06T04:30:14 <sipa> this channel is about development of bitcoin core
1532016-08-06T04:30:29 <sipa> i doubt many people involved with bitcoin core development are interested in this
1542016-08-06T04:31:47 <sonlin> We shall see
1552016-08-06T04:39:27 *** sonlin has quit IRC
1562016-08-06T04:39:53 <midnightmagic> \o/
1572016-08-06T04:50:31 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1582016-08-06T04:55:10 *** d_t has quit IRC
1592016-08-06T05:05:19 *** jtimon has quit IRC
1602016-08-06T05:42:11 *** kadoban has quit IRC
1612016-08-06T06:27:57 <GitHub43> [bitcoin] luke-jr opened pull request #8471: Key origin metadata, with HD wallet support (master...keyorigin_hd) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8471
1622016-08-06T06:36:02 *** felipelalli has quit IRC
1632016-08-06T07:23:55 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1642016-08-06T07:24:03 *** aalex has quit IRC
1652016-08-06T07:28:39 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662016-08-06T07:36:31 *** Ginnarr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1672016-08-06T07:43:16 *** ArthurNumbanumba has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1682016-08-06T08:24:37 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
1692016-08-06T08:33:36 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702016-08-06T08:44:20 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1712016-08-06T08:49:49 *** ghtdak has quit IRC
1722016-08-06T08:50:20 *** ghtdak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1732016-08-06T08:50:58 *** pmienk has quit IRC
1742016-08-06T08:52:23 *** pmienk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752016-08-06T09:02:31 <GitHub160> [bitcoin] paveljanik opened pull request #8472: Do not shadow LOCK's criticalblock variable for LOCK inside LOCK (master...20160806_Wshadow_LOCK) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8472
1762016-08-06T09:10:06 *** laurentmt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772016-08-06T09:10:12 *** laurentmt has quit IRC
1782016-08-06T09:15:01 *** aalex has quit IRC
1792016-08-06T09:18:35 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802016-08-06T09:26:47 *** Ginnarr has quit IRC
1812016-08-06T09:44:00 *** arubi_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1822016-08-06T09:44:46 *** FNinTak has quit IRC
1832016-08-06T09:48:05 *** arubi has quit IRC
1842016-08-06T10:05:59 *** arubi__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852016-08-06T10:09:07 *** arubi_ has quit IRC
1862016-08-06T10:13:26 *** fengling has quit IRC
1872016-08-06T10:18:29 *** stalker_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1882016-08-06T10:18:57 *** stalker_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892016-08-06T10:27:45 *** MarcoFalke has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1902016-08-06T10:41:02 *** gmaxwell has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912016-08-06T10:45:50 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
1922016-08-06T10:59:40 *** belcher has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1932016-08-06T10:59:45 *** anu1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1942016-08-06T11:03:14 *** anu0 has quit IRC
1952016-08-06T11:21:38 *** arubi_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1962016-08-06T11:24:36 *** d_t has quit IRC
1972016-08-06T11:25:02 *** arubi__ has quit IRC
1982016-08-06T11:39:25 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1992016-08-06T11:42:37 *** arubi__ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2002016-08-06T11:47:00 *** arubi_ has quit IRC
2012016-08-06T12:01:50 *** blur3d has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2022016-08-06T12:09:52 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032016-08-06T12:33:11 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042016-08-06T12:48:25 *** jtimon has quit IRC
2052016-08-06T12:57:36 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2062016-08-06T13:22:36 *** harrymm has quit IRC
2072016-08-06T13:30:51 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2082016-08-06T13:45:58 *** Guest79503 is now known as pigeons
2092016-08-06T13:47:32 *** arubi__ has quit IRC
2102016-08-06T13:47:57 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112016-08-06T13:50:49 *** arubi has quit IRC
2122016-08-06T13:51:31 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132016-08-06T13:52:07 *** arubi has quit IRC
2142016-08-06T13:55:04 *** arubi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152016-08-06T13:56:59 *** cjd has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162016-08-06T14:04:39 *** Yogh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172016-08-06T14:06:19 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2182016-08-06T14:06:48 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2192016-08-06T14:17:34 *** Yogh has quit IRC
2202016-08-06T14:23:50 *** Yogh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212016-08-06T14:25:34 *** Yogh has quit IRC
2222016-08-06T14:26:39 *** Yogh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2232016-08-06T14:27:39 *** Yogh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2242016-08-06T14:33:16 *** Yogh has quit IRC
2252016-08-06T14:35:45 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2262016-08-06T14:45:28 *** pmienk has quit IRC
2272016-08-06T14:50:06 *** Yogh has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2282016-08-06T14:57:06 *** pmienk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2292016-08-06T14:58:10 *** mkarrer has quit IRC
2302016-08-06T14:58:57 *** mkarrer has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2312016-08-06T14:59:10 *** TomMc has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2322016-08-06T15:03:54 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: sipa: I guess the current bip151 rekeying has no forward secrecy. It's hash(old-sym-key). What about hkdf(ecdh_secret, old_syn_key) instead?
2332016-08-06T15:05:14 <jonasschnelli> S/old_syn_key/old_sym_key
2342016-08-06T15:07:53 *** d_t has quit IRC
2352016-08-06T15:24:39 *** aalex has quit IRC
2362016-08-06T15:33:32 *** aalex has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2372016-08-06T15:38:07 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2382016-08-06T16:38:28 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
2392016-08-06T16:49:15 *** shesek has quit IRC
2402016-08-06T17:12:21 *** btcfan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2412016-08-06T17:13:59 *** btcok has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2422016-08-06T17:15:50 *** Ylbam has quit IRC
2432016-08-06T17:17:34 *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2442016-08-06T17:31:40 *** anu1 has quit IRC
2452016-08-06T17:37:21 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
2462016-08-06T17:43:50 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2472016-08-06T18:06:56 *** stalker_ has quit IRC
2482016-08-06T18:14:15 <GitHub87> [bitcoin] clickkarog opened pull request #8473: 0 9 (master...0.9) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8473
2492016-08-06T18:16:15 <GitHub185> [bitcoin] jonasschnelli closed pull request #8473: 0 9 (master...0.9) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8473
2502016-08-06T18:19:11 *** gluytium has quit IRC
2512016-08-06T18:20:28 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2522016-08-06T18:24:13 <GitHub83> [bitcoin] clickkarog opened pull request #8474: 0 9 (master...0.9) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8474
2532016-08-06T18:29:52 *** felipelalli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2542016-08-06T18:29:52 *** felipelalli has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2552016-08-06T18:30:22 <GitHub74> [bitcoin] clickkarog opened pull request #8475: 0 10 (master...0.10) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8475
2562016-08-06T18:30:28 *** gluytium has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2572016-08-06T18:33:37 <GitHub107> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #8475: 0 10 (master...0.10) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8475
2582016-08-06T18:34:12 <GitHub58> [bitcoin] sipa closed pull request #8474: 0 9 (master...0.9) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8474
2592016-08-06T18:34:34 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: it is forward secure. Forward secure means an attacker which later gets access to the hosts and has a transcript of the communication cannot decode the transcript. The hashing is distructive, it cannot be reversed.
2602016-08-06T18:35:01 <gmaxwell> And it is fast so it can be frequently done, narrowing the window of compromise to pratically nothing.
2612016-08-06T18:36:29 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2622016-08-06T18:40:19 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: what you're suggesting would provide what SP800-90A calls prediction resistance. Which means that if an attacker gets a full read-only snapshot of your memory at some point, his ability to continue decoding the transcript at some point will stop.
2632016-08-06T18:43:57 <gmaxwell> Which isn't worthless-- but at what cost? with the added aggregate computational cost of that, I'd rather have initial key agreement which is secure against ECC breaks (E.g. quantum computers). simply because the attack model where an attacker can extract your session keys but for some reason can't just extract them again after you rekey, doesn't seem very interesting.
2642016-08-06T18:48:43 <GitHub79> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke closed pull request #8253: [TEST] [Travis] Remove hostname workaround (master...remove-travis-workaround) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8253
2652016-08-06T18:49:41 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2662016-08-06T18:50:50 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: IMO the problem with the current BIP rekey design is, if an attacker could manage to steal one symmetric key, he can also decrypt/tamper after a rekey.
2672016-08-06T18:51:31 <jonasschnelli> Maybe instead of hash(oldkey) we could just use hmac(oldkey, hash(ECDH-secret))
2682016-08-06T18:51:59 <jonasschnelli> (Where the second parameter is the HMAC key)
2692016-08-06T18:52:41 <jonasschnelli> The cost of a HMAC instead of a SHA should be minimal
2702016-08-06T18:53:00 <sipa> if he can steal the symmetric key, why would he not be able to steal the ecdh secret?
2712016-08-06T18:53:11 *** droark has quit IRC
2722016-08-06T18:53:38 <jonasschnelli> If the symmetric cipher is broken and he can do a known plaintext attack or something...
2732016-08-06T18:54:02 <jonasschnelli> Not sure... But I think the cost/benefits of HMAC over hash for a rekey is worth doing it.
2742016-08-06T18:55:36 <gmaxwell> hmac doesn't change anything here.
2752016-08-06T18:56:10 <gmaxwell> jonasschnelli: if he can do then the the cipher is totally busted, esp as the keying state is larger than is used in any given block, but sure the rekey could include the session ID.
2762016-08-06T18:59:28 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: wouldn't HMAC(oldkey, key=session_id or ecdh-secret) be considered more robust then just hash(oldkey)?
2772016-08-06T19:00:00 <jonasschnelli> But right, we should use the session-Id instead of hash(ecdh) secret.
2782016-08-06T19:00:13 <jonasschnelli> The session id was HKDF derived.
2792016-08-06T19:00:27 <gmaxwell> you must not keep around ecdh-secret, or backtracking resistance (forward secrecy) is diminished.
2802016-08-06T19:01:17 <jonasschnelli> Okay. So then HMAC with the session id as key?
2812016-08-06T19:01:38 <gmaxwell> HMAC vs using a hash is irrelevant in this place. Having the session id in there is fine.
2822016-08-06T19:02:49 <jonasschnelli> Okay. hash(oldkey | sessionid)?
2832016-08-06T19:03:49 <gmaxwell> sessionid first would be more natural.
2842016-08-06T19:09:36 <jonasschnelli> gmaxwell: is there no security advantage using HMAC(oldkey, sessionID) over hash(sessionID || oldkey)?
2852016-08-06T19:11:24 <sipa> jonasschnelli: no, hmac only protects against length extension attacks
2862016-08-06T19:11:36 <sipa> jonasschnelli: which don't apply if the input data to the hash is constant size
2872016-08-06T19:11:48 <jonasschnelli> Ok
2882016-08-06T19:55:38 *** Ylbam has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2892016-08-06T20:02:13 *** kadoban has quit IRC
2902016-08-06T20:02:34 *** kadoban has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2912016-08-06T20:05:43 *** NicolasDorier_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2922016-08-06T20:09:27 *** NicolasDorier has quit IRC
2932016-08-06T20:09:28 *** NicolasDorier_ is now known as NicolasDorier
2942016-08-06T20:10:41 *** btcfan has quit IRC
2952016-08-06T20:13:02 *** sgeisler has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2962016-08-06T20:28:04 *** jtimon has quit IRC
2972016-08-06T20:32:20 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2982016-08-06T20:43:31 *** btcok has quit IRC
2992016-08-06T20:52:43 <GitHub1> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #8477: [qa] Temporarily disable ipv6 in rpcbind test (master...Mf1608-qaIpv6) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/8477
3002016-08-06T20:52:51 *** d_t has quit IRC
3012016-08-06T20:55:40 *** felipelalli has quit IRC
3022016-08-06T21:26:47 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3032016-08-06T21:35:25 *** BashCo has quit IRC
3042016-08-06T21:43:04 *** gribble has quit IRC
3052016-08-06T21:43:58 *** MarcoFalke has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3062016-08-06T21:48:34 *** pmienk has quit IRC
3072016-08-06T21:51:48 *** gribble has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3082016-08-06T22:01:34 *** pmienk has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092016-08-06T22:37:21 *** BashCo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3102016-08-06T22:39:30 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
3112016-08-06T22:57:32 *** d_t has quit IRC
3122016-08-06T22:59:55 *** d_t has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3132016-08-06T23:11:56 *** BashCo has quit IRC
3142016-08-06T23:19:24 *** droark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3152016-08-06T23:27:10 *** d_t has quit IRC
3162016-08-06T23:53:30 *** btcfan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3172016-08-06T23:57:50 *** btcfan has quit IRC
3182016-08-06T23:58:29 *** kadoban has quit IRC