12019-12-05T00:11:52 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
22019-12-05T00:41:41 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
32019-12-05T00:46:19 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
42019-12-05T01:06:24 <sosthene> Hi there, sorry if it has already been said here but I've been off those days and might have miss the information, I just noticed I didn't get an email last sunday, is the code review over?
52019-12-05T01:07:04 <sipa> no
62019-12-05T01:07:48 <aj> nope, missed sending the email; the content's at https://github.com/ajtowns/taproot-review/blob/master/week-5.md
72019-12-05T01:33:17 *** arik_ has quit IRC
82019-12-05T02:03:50 *** davterra has quit IRC
92019-12-05T02:05:41 *** davterra has joined ##taproot-bip-review
102019-12-05T02:11:39 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
112019-12-05T02:16:11 <sipa> no second Q&A session this week, i guess?
122019-12-05T02:16:15 * sipa is here
132019-12-05T02:21:23 <aj> well, as a meta-question, i've been wondering what we want to ask everyone at the end of the review, beyond just "hey how cool is taproot/tapscript/schnorr? 1=very cool 5=extremely cool"
142019-12-05T02:27:24 <aj> https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/P2SH_Votes https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Segwit_support https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/BIP_0016_QA might be comparable
152019-12-05T02:37:59 <gmaxwell> I think it's harder to get a comprehensive review without also reviewing the implementation, which this process wasn't doing.
162019-12-05T02:38:54 <sipa> yeah, i think that kind of yay/nay (if needed at all) is for a later stage
172019-12-05T02:39:06 <aj> should get bip numbers assigned first, and i think we want to improve the implementation before heavy review of it?
182019-12-05T02:39:28 <sipa> the tests need improvement
192019-12-05T02:39:46 <sipa> otherwise i'm (personally) pretty happy with the code already
202019-12-05T02:40:00 <aj> oh, that's great
212019-12-05T02:40:15 <gmaxwell> sipa: right, but I think people haven't been looking at the implementation (at least not as part of this process)
222019-12-05T02:40:25 <sipa> gmaxwell: yes, i've been actively suggesting not to
232019-12-05T02:40:36 <aj> i've been redoing anyprevout on the new code, and it seems good. i had a couple of tweaks to make it easier to do unknown pubkey updates
242019-12-05T02:40:48 <aj> but the tests are hard :(
252019-12-05T02:41:50 <gmaxwell> sipa: If there is a backcompat minor revision of BIP-173 would it make sense to make v8-v16 explicitly reserved as non-encodable versions?
262019-12-05T02:42:17 <sipa> possibly, yes - or non-encodable versions could use non-length-32 ;)
272019-12-05T02:42:37 <aj> non-length 20 and 0x20 ?
282019-12-05T02:42:41 <sipa> yeah
292019-12-05T02:42:55 <gmaxwell> oh good point.
302019-12-05T02:43:17 <sipa> if that sounds crazy (because we shouldn't let tx output lengths depend on a weird address encoding problem), i think there is actually an independent good reason for that
312019-12-05T02:43:42 <sipa> things that we actually expect on-chain should be prioritized to be given 32-byte outputs (without other marker bytes)
322019-12-05T02:44:19 <sipa> as there are only 16 of them
332019-12-05T02:44:32 <sipa> and i believe there were some vague arguments why these non-encodable things would actually be only useful in non-cooperative scenarios anyway (even their creation)
342019-12-05T02:46:19 <gmaxwell> Sure, 4wu is not the end of the world in any case.
352019-12-05T02:48:36 <aj> using up one of 3840 v1-v16 33-bytes for weird rare cases that only programs should deal with instead of the 14 v2-v16 32-byte possibilities makes sense to me
362019-12-05T02:50:32 <aj> the idea for the v16-identifiable-anyprevout stuff was that you'd only create it programmatically not manually via an address, and only do so if you were forced to a non-cooperative thing to remain indistinguishable in the cooperative case, so that would fit -- the extra 4WU in the address would just be noise due to the uncooperativeness anyway probably
372019-12-05T02:56:49 <sipa> gmaxwell: anyway, my wasn't that because i'm ok with the code it's somehow completsly ready - just that once we're done with the bips i don't there is much left to do before it can be code reviewed
382019-12-05T02:56:59 <sipa> *completely
392019-12-05T03:00:22 <gmaxwell> right, my only point is that aj's yea/ney suggestions need to have the benefit of people having looked at an implementation.
402019-12-05T03:06:32 <aj> well, yea/nay at this point is only really "any big problems with the bips or are we ready to get them numbers and move onto serious code review?" i think?
412019-12-05T03:23:14 <sipa> yeah
422019-12-05T03:24:08 *** ZmnSCPxj has joined ##taproot-bip-review
432019-12-05T03:25:45 *** ZmnSCPxj_ has quit IRC
442019-12-05T04:11:41 *** ZmnSCPxj has quit IRC
452019-12-05T04:25:36 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
462019-12-05T04:50:44 *** pinheadmz has joined ##taproot-bip-review
472019-12-05T05:00:52 *** arik_ has quit IRC
482019-12-05T05:15:08 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
492019-12-05T05:36:37 *** sipa has quit IRC
502019-12-05T05:36:38 *** afk11 has quit IRC
512019-12-05T05:37:05 *** _andrewtoth_ has quit IRC
522019-12-05T05:38:26 *** arik_ has quit IRC
532019-12-05T05:57:26 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
542019-12-05T06:03:44 *** afk11 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
552019-12-05T06:58:16 *** Kiminuo has joined ##taproot-bip-review
562019-12-05T07:06:22 *** arik_ has quit IRC
572019-12-05T07:10:41 *** kabaum has joined ##taproot-bip-review
582019-12-05T07:36:40 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
592019-12-05T08:07:42 *** arik_ has quit IRC
602019-12-05T08:34:40 *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
612019-12-05T08:38:16 *** gmaxwell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
622019-12-05T08:57:54 *** b10c has joined ##taproot-bip-review
632019-12-05T09:01:06 *** Kiminuo2 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
642019-12-05T09:02:23 *** Kiminuo has quit IRC
652019-12-05T09:19:04 *** ZmnSCPxj has joined ##taproot-bip-review
662019-12-05T09:54:39 *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
672019-12-05T09:54:40 *** real_or_random has quit IRC
682019-12-05T09:54:40 *** pipirell1 has quit IRC
692019-12-05T09:54:41 *** ZmnSCPxj has quit IRC
702019-12-05T09:54:41 *** kabaum has quit IRC
712019-12-05T09:54:42 *** jonatack has quit IRC
722019-12-05T09:54:42 *** andytoshi has quit IRC
732019-12-05T09:54:42 *** sanket1729 has quit IRC
742019-12-05T09:54:52 *** Murch has quit IRC
752019-12-05T09:54:53 *** Lexyon__ has quit IRC
762019-12-05T09:54:54 *** philbw4 has quit IRC
772019-12-05T09:54:55 *** kanzure has quit IRC
782019-12-05T09:54:55 *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
792019-12-05T09:54:57 *** davterra has quit IRC
802019-12-05T09:54:59 *** rottensox has quit IRC
812019-12-05T09:55:00 *** ariard has quit IRC
822019-12-05T09:55:01 *** raj_149 has quit IRC
832019-12-05T09:55:02 *** belcher has quit IRC
842019-12-05T09:55:02 *** orlovsky has quit IRC
852019-12-05T09:55:04 *** elichai2 has quit IRC
862019-12-05T09:55:04 *** dr_orlovsky has quit IRC
872019-12-05T09:55:05 *** hebasto has quit IRC
882019-12-05T09:55:07 *** chm-diederichs has quit IRC
892019-12-05T09:55:07 *** cdecker has quit IRC
902019-12-05T09:55:07 *** nothingmuch has quit IRC
912019-12-05T09:55:08 *** nehan has quit IRC
922019-12-05T09:55:17 *** so has quit IRC
932019-12-05T09:56:24 *** Murch has joined ##taproot-bip-review
942019-12-05T09:56:24 *** Lexyon__ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
952019-12-05T09:56:24 *** kanzure has joined ##taproot-bip-review
962019-12-05T09:56:24 *** philbw4 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
972019-12-05T09:56:24 *** RubenSomsen has joined ##taproot-bip-review
982019-12-05T09:59:48 *** davterra has joined ##taproot-bip-review
992019-12-05T09:59:48 *** rottensox has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1002019-12-05T09:59:48 *** ariard has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1012019-12-05T09:59:48 *** raj_149 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1022019-12-05T10:00:26 *** Murch has quit IRC
1032019-12-05T10:00:27 *** Lexyon__ has quit IRC
1042019-12-05T10:00:28 *** philbw4 has quit IRC
1052019-12-05T10:00:28 *** kanzure has quit IRC
1062019-12-05T10:00:29 *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
1072019-12-05T10:01:30 *** Murch has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1082019-12-05T10:01:30 *** Lexyon__ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1092019-12-05T10:01:30 *** kanzure has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1102019-12-05T10:01:30 *** philbw4 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1112019-12-05T10:01:30 *** RubenSomsen has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1122019-12-05T10:01:53 *** ZmnSCPxj has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1132019-12-05T10:01:53 *** kabaum has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1142019-12-05T10:01:53 *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1152019-12-05T10:01:53 *** sanket1729 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1162019-12-05T10:03:43 *** so has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1172019-12-05T10:03:49 *** gmaxwell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1182019-12-05T10:03:57 *** real_or_random has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1192019-12-05T10:03:57 *** pipirell1 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1202019-12-05T10:04:20 *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1212019-12-05T10:04:20 *** orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1222019-12-05T10:04:20 *** nehan has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1232019-12-05T10:04:20 *** elichai2 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1242019-12-05T10:04:20 *** dr_orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1252019-12-05T10:04:20 *** hebasto has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1262019-12-05T10:04:20 *** chm-diederichs has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1272019-12-05T10:04:20 *** nothingmuch has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1282019-12-05T10:04:20 *** cdecker has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1292019-12-05T10:07:53 *** elichai2 has quit IRC
1302019-12-05T10:09:06 *** elichai2 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1312019-12-05T10:23:21 *** belcher has quit IRC
1322019-12-05T10:52:04 *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1332019-12-05T11:08:55 *** orlovsky has quit IRC
1342019-12-05T11:16:08 *** belcher has quit IRC
1352019-12-05T11:25:01 *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1362019-12-05T11:34:59 *** andytoshi has quit IRC
1372019-12-05T11:54:57 *** Kiminuo2 has quit IRC
1382019-12-05T12:36:58 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1392019-12-05T13:01:45 *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1402019-12-05T13:02:57 *** ZmnSCPxj has quit IRC
1412019-12-05T14:02:09 <instagibbs> kind of helps to not look at code so people demand clarity from the bips, at least at this stage
1422019-12-05T14:16:18 *** andytoshi has quit IRC
1432019-12-05T14:16:32 *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1442019-12-05T14:16:32 *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1452019-12-05T14:24:46 *** _andrewtoth_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1462019-12-05T14:32:56 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1472019-12-05T14:37:13 *** pyskell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1482019-12-05T14:48:42 *** pyskell has quit IRC
1492019-12-05T15:09:31 *** arik_ has quit IRC
1502019-12-05T15:11:57 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1512019-12-05T15:16:56 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1522019-12-05T16:07:06 *** jonatack has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1532019-12-05T16:27:05 <waxwing> so how about not calling adaptor signatures 'signatures'. i mentioned this to andytoshi and he correctly countered "yes of course, it's just another way to say they're deniable". Clearly very true, i just have a vague concern that people may think they have the properties of a signature.
1542019-12-05T16:27:37 <waxwing> gave an example here: https://x0f.org/web/statuses/102897691888130818 although for those in the know i realise it's trivial.
1552019-12-05T16:28:10 <waxwing> so like when we say in the BIP "Adaptor signatures can be produced by a signer by offsetting his public nonce.." of course it's true but .. so can anyone else.
1562019-12-05T16:28:35 <waxwing> feel free to argue that it's not really relevant as there isn't a plausible way someone can misconceive this and then somehow set up a protocol that fails because of it :)
1572019-12-05T16:39:28 *** dr-orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1582019-12-05T16:48:16 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1592019-12-05T16:59:02 *** dr-orlovsky has quit IRC
1602019-12-05T17:19:33 <instagibbs> it doesn't say it's a secure signature ;)
1612019-12-05T17:21:40 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1622019-12-05T17:25:57 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1632019-12-05T17:28:57 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1642019-12-05T17:40:15 *** arik_ has quit IRC
1652019-12-05T17:55:26 *** r251d has quit IRC
1662019-12-05T18:08:05 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1672019-12-05T18:09:03 *** b10c has quit IRC
1682019-12-05T18:14:05 *** arik_ has quit IRC
1692019-12-05T18:36:00 *** pyskell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1702019-12-05T18:36:35 *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1712019-12-05T18:49:38 *** arik_ has quit IRC
1722019-12-05T20:08:17 *** jonatack has quit IRC
1732019-12-05T20:23:45 *** dr-orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1742019-12-05T21:30:32 <gmaxwell> Would the thing roconnor is suggesting be accomplished by having each executed codesep appened its 1-indexed position to the signature hash preimage followed by a final 0x00? OP_BREADCRUMB
1752019-12-05T21:44:02 *** pyskell has quit IRC
1762019-12-05T21:50:32 *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
1772019-12-05T22:16:08 *** belcher has quit IRC
1782019-12-05T22:31:55 *** jonatack has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1792019-12-05T23:07:38 *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1802019-12-05T23:09:28 *** davterra has quit IRC
1812019-12-05T23:10:32 *** davterra has joined ##taproot-bip-review
1822019-12-05T23:47:55 *** dr-orlovsky has quit IRC
1832019-12-05T23:48:04 *** orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review