12019-02-07T00:06:03 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
22019-02-07T00:16:44 *** pinheadmz has left #bitcoin-core-dev
32019-02-07T00:17:06 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
42019-02-07T00:23:58 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
52019-02-07T00:24:20 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
62019-02-07T00:24:59 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
72019-02-07T00:59:33 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
82019-02-07T01:03:21 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
92019-02-07T01:13:12 *** Jamesorty has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
102019-02-07T01:13:12 *** Jamesorty has left #bitcoin-core-dev
112019-02-07T01:19:10 *** DeanGuss has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
122019-02-07T01:38:13 *** rhavar_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
132019-02-07T01:47:15 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
142019-02-07T01:53:17 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
152019-02-07T01:53:42 *** Murch has quit IRC
162019-02-07T01:54:46 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
172019-02-07T02:08:26 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
182019-02-07T02:48:04 *** skyikot has quit IRC
192019-02-07T02:50:57 *** ap4lmtree- has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
202019-02-07T02:53:31 *** harrymm has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
212019-02-07T02:53:48 *** ap4lmtree has quit IRC
222019-02-07T03:08:22 *** ogru has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
232019-02-07T03:08:24 *** ogru has left #bitcoin-core-dev
242019-02-07T03:20:10 *** drexl has quit IRC
252019-02-07T03:27:22 *** skyikot has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
262019-02-07T03:28:45 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
272019-02-07T03:34:25 *** Murch has quit IRC
282019-02-07T03:35:05 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
292019-02-07T03:36:01 *** Murch has quit IRC
302019-02-07T03:39:03 *** Dienqeall has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
312019-02-07T03:39:05 *** Dienqeall has left #bitcoin-core-dev
322019-02-07T03:42:40 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
332019-02-07T03:49:01 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
342019-02-07T03:50:08 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
352019-02-07T03:51:13 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
362019-02-07T03:52:34 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
372019-02-07T03:57:57 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
382019-02-07T03:58:23 *** instagibbs has quit IRC
392019-02-07T03:59:00 *** ap4lmtree- is now known as ap4lmtree
402019-02-07T04:00:47 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
412019-02-07T04:02:33 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
422019-02-07T04:02:52 *** Skirmant has quit IRC
432019-02-07T04:07:03 *** ghost43 has quit IRC
442019-02-07T04:08:35 *** ddustin_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
452019-02-07T04:11:42 *** ddustin has quit IRC
462019-02-07T04:11:54 *** ghost43 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
472019-02-07T04:31:11 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
482019-02-07T04:44:46 *** volkov has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
492019-02-07T04:50:32 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
502019-02-07T05:03:46 *** ddustin_ has quit IRC
512019-02-07T05:04:22 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
522019-02-07T05:08:26 *** ddustin has quit IRC
532019-02-07T05:37:35 *** skyikot has quit IRC
542019-02-07T05:45:50 *** ap4lmtree has quit IRC
552019-02-07T05:52:22 *** ap4lmtree has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
562019-02-07T05:53:47 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
572019-02-07T05:58:07 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
582019-02-07T05:59:51 *** Xianglo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
592019-02-07T06:09:59 *** Xianglo has quit IRC
602019-02-07T06:13:55 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
612019-02-07T06:14:12 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
622019-02-07T06:14:21 *** StopAndDecrypt has quit IRC
632019-02-07T06:14:22 *** StopAndDecrypt has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
642019-02-07T06:54:52 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
652019-02-07T07:13:44 *** Xianglo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
662019-02-07T07:14:06 *** ctrlbreak has quit IRC
672019-02-07T07:14:28 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
682019-02-07T07:14:33 *** ctrlbreak has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
692019-02-07T07:15:32 *** Xianglo has quit IRC
702019-02-07T07:16:49 *** Jackielove4u has quit IRC
712019-02-07T07:17:14 *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
722019-02-07T07:25:29 *** Xianglo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
732019-02-07T07:25:40 *** Xianglo has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
742019-02-07T07:27:58 *** Xianglo has quit IRC
752019-02-07T07:31:16 *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
762019-02-07T07:37:54 *** Jackielove4u has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
772019-02-07T07:52:16 *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
782019-02-07T07:53:01 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
792019-02-07T08:03:58 *** ctrlbreak_MAD has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
802019-02-07T08:07:08 *** ctrlbreak has quit IRC
812019-02-07T08:39:09 *** niu has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
822019-02-07T08:44:58 *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
832019-02-07T08:46:26 *** niu has quit IRC
842019-02-07T08:57:15 *** darosior has quit IRC
852019-02-07T08:59:51 *** volkov has quit IRC
862019-02-07T09:00:04 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
872019-02-07T09:06:01 *** setpill has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
882019-02-07T09:10:08 *** Murch has quit IRC
892019-02-07T09:12:12 *** darosior has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
902019-02-07T09:14:28 *** midnightmagic has quit IRC
912019-02-07T09:16:31 *** darosior has quit IRC
922019-02-07T09:17:45 *** ddustin has quit IRC
932019-02-07T09:18:45 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
942019-02-07T09:23:28 *** ddustin has quit IRC
952019-02-07T09:36:04 *** midnightmagic has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
962019-02-07T09:37:19 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
972019-02-07T09:39:23 *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
982019-02-07T09:41:32 *** phwalkr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
992019-02-07T09:42:00 *** timothy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1002019-02-07T09:49:56 *** jtimon has quit IRC
1012019-02-07T09:55:51 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1022019-02-07T10:01:16 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1032019-02-07T10:07:49 <gwillen> ... why does the test runner keep logs in files named "test_runner_â¿_ð_...", with a unicode bitcoin sign and a unicode running-man emoji
1042019-02-07T10:13:01 <echeveria> gwillen: to check if your filesystem supports UTF characters.
1052019-02-07T10:27:40 *** rhavar_ has quit IRC
1062019-02-07T10:35:51 <phwalkr> Is it possible/common to build a transaction with inputs of different types? I mean, one p2sh input, one p2pkh input and so on
1072019-02-07T10:36:32 <echeveria> phwalkr: this is normal. more a question for #bitcoin.
1082019-02-07T10:37:38 <phwalkr> echeveria: Sorry about that. And thank you for answering it!
1092019-02-07T10:38:47 <warren> I've noticed in recent years that the download size savings of .drpm vs .rpm is only a small % these days. I wonder if something about builds containing randomization makes the delta between before and after much larger than it used to years ago. In most cases it's faster to turn off deltarpm entirely.
1102019-02-07T10:42:25 <Lauda> Has anyone encountered the following error during building depends for winx64 on Ubuntu 16 (0.17.1 tag)?
1112019-02-07T10:42:25 <Lauda> "qwin10helpers.cpp:60:37: fatal error: uiviewsettingsinterop.h: No such file or directory"
1122019-02-07T10:44:12 *** tryphe has quit IRC
1132019-02-07T10:45:28 <warren> oops wrong channel sorry
1142019-02-07T10:46:19 *** tryphe has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1152019-02-07T10:50:33 *** oneark has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1162019-02-07T10:54:40 <Lauda> qt 5.9.6 is where it fails if I'm reading this correctly
1172019-02-07T10:56:17 *** spinza has quit IRC
1182019-02-07T10:59:47 *** shesek has quit IRC
1192019-02-07T11:02:16 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1202019-02-07T11:17:39 *** fanquake has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1212019-02-07T11:30:46 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1222019-02-07T11:30:59 <luke-jr> [10:13:01] <echeveria> gwillen: to check if your filesystem supports UTF characters. <-- rather, to check that the Bitcoin Core code correctly handles the unicode
1232019-02-07T11:45:04 *** drexl has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1242019-02-07T11:59:18 *** spinza has quit IRC
1252019-02-07T12:09:19 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1262019-02-07T12:34:22 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1272019-02-07T13:10:09 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1282019-02-07T13:10:09 *** cubancorona has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1292019-02-07T13:10:09 *** shesek has quit IRC
1302019-02-07T13:10:09 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1312019-02-07T13:22:26 *** fanquake has quit IRC
1322019-02-07T13:37:27 *** brianhoffman has quit IRC
1332019-02-07T13:38:30 *** promag has quit IRC
1342019-02-07T13:41:07 *** Zenton has quit IRC
1352019-02-07T13:48:10 *** instagibbs has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1362019-02-07T14:04:45 *** IGHOR has quit IRC
1372019-02-07T14:07:27 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1382019-02-07T14:11:35 *** promag has quit IRC
1392019-02-07T14:14:15 *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1402019-02-07T14:16:22 *** mistergold has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1412019-02-07T14:20:40 *** riemann_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1422019-02-07T14:23:08 *** riemann has quit IRC
1432019-02-07T14:26:01 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1442019-02-07T14:28:00 *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1452019-02-07T14:30:45 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1462019-02-07T14:35:42 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1472019-02-07T14:35:42 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] promag opened pull request #15363: http: Exit the event loop as soon as there are no active events (master...2019-01-loopexit) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15363
1482019-02-07T14:35:46 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1492019-02-07T14:37:04 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
1502019-02-07T14:38:27 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1512019-02-07T14:39:09 <promag> sdaftuar: with the above your new test runs in 3 sec
1522019-02-07T14:51:18 *** Guyver2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1532019-02-07T14:59:57 <promag> provoostenator: ping
1542019-02-07T15:06:45 *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1552019-02-07T15:07:59 <nsh> strange question but
1562019-02-07T15:08:09 <nsh> what's the minimum number of chars for a brain wallet passphrase for a btc privkey?
1572019-02-07T15:08:21 <nsh> ideally something that i can spell out with the pieces of a standard scrabble board
1582019-02-07T15:08:32 <nsh> (sorry meant to ask next-door)
1592019-02-07T15:16:13 *** volkov has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1602019-02-07T15:18:35 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1612019-02-07T15:18:36 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/72d34c0edc5a...d83d6079432c
1622019-02-07T15:18:36 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 6440e61 João Barbosa: qa: Drop RPC connection if --usecli
1632019-02-07T15:18:37 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d83d607 MarcoFalke: Merge #15350: qa: Drop RPC connection if --usecli
1642019-02-07T15:18:41 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1652019-02-07T15:19:35 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1662019-02-07T15:19:35 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke merged pull request #15350: qa: Drop RPC connection if --usecli (master...2019-01-fixusecli) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15350
1672019-02-07T15:19:36 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1682019-02-07T15:19:42 *** ddustin has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1692019-02-07T15:25:29 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1702019-02-07T15:30:08 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
1712019-02-07T15:31:51 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1722019-02-07T15:39:36 *** promag has quit IRC
1732019-02-07T15:40:25 *** volkov has quit IRC
1742019-02-07T15:41:27 *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1752019-02-07T15:47:56 *** hebasto has quit IRC
1762019-02-07T15:54:39 *** bralyclo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1772019-02-07T15:58:00 *** bralyclow has quit IRC
1782019-02-07T16:04:16 *** setpill has quit IRC
1792019-02-07T16:21:39 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1802019-02-07T16:33:40 *** Skirmant has quit IRC
1812019-02-07T16:37:02 *** justanotheruser has quit IRC
1822019-02-07T16:40:58 *** EagleTM has quit IRC
1832019-02-07T16:43:26 *** emilr has quit IRC
1842019-02-07T16:43:50 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1852019-02-07T16:57:47 *** justanotheruser has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1862019-02-07T16:59:24 *** IGHOR has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1872019-02-07T17:02:45 *** fan_of_defi has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1882019-02-07T17:09:08 *** afk11 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1892019-02-07T17:13:54 *** bralyclo_ has quit IRC
1902019-02-07T17:15:25 *** hebasto has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1912019-02-07T17:26:33 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1922019-02-07T17:26:33 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #15364: qa: Fix race in feature_notifications (master...Mf1902-qaNotifRace) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15364
1932019-02-07T17:26:34 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
1942019-02-07T17:27:00 *** fan_of_defi has quit IRC
1952019-02-07T17:33:24 *** Murch has quit IRC
1962019-02-07T17:34:22 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
1972019-02-07T17:37:57 *** oneark has quit IRC
1982019-02-07T17:44:19 *** mistergold has quit IRC
1992019-02-07T17:59:10 *** Murch has quit IRC
2002019-02-07T18:00:03 *** dgenr8 has quit IRC
2012019-02-07T18:01:24 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
2022019-02-07T18:02:36 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2032019-02-07T18:05:09 *** emilr has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2042019-02-07T18:07:30 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2052019-02-07T18:07:46 *** Murch has quit IRC
2062019-02-07T18:08:37 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2072019-02-07T18:17:08 *** riemann_ has quit IRC
2082019-02-07T18:20:45 *** kexkey has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2092019-02-07T18:24:56 *** profmac has quit IRC
2102019-02-07T18:28:44 *** profmac has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2112019-02-07T18:29:20 *** Murch has quit IRC
2122019-02-07T18:30:20 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2132019-02-07T18:31:47 *** Murch has quit IRC
2142019-02-07T18:32:39 *** Skirmant has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2152019-02-07T18:33:03 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2162019-02-07T18:33:47 *** wale2r has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2172019-02-07T18:43:45 *** Murch has quit IRC
2182019-02-07T18:45:56 *** Zenton has quit IRC
2192019-02-07T18:50:26 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2202019-02-07T18:52:23 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2212019-02-07T18:59:07 *** michaelsdunn1 has quit IRC
2222019-02-07T19:00:53 <achow101> meeting?
2232019-02-07T19:01:18 <luke-jr> ..
2242019-02-07T19:01:27 <wumpus> #startmeeting
2252019-02-07T19:01:27 <lightningbot> Meeting started Thu Feb 7 19:01:27 2019 UTC. The chair is wumpus. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
2262019-02-07T19:01:27 <lightningbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
2272019-02-07T19:01:37 <jnewbery> hi
2282019-02-07T19:01:45 <jonasschnelli> hi
2292019-02-07T19:01:47 <wumpus> #bitcoin-core-dev Meeting: wumpus sipa gmaxwell jonasschnelli morcos luke-jr sdaftuar jtimon cfields petertodd kanzure bluematt instagibbs phantomcircuit codeshark michagogo marcofalke paveljanik NicolasDorier jl2012 achow101 meshcollider jnewbery maaku fanquake promag provoostenator aj Chris_Stewart_5 dongcarl gwillen jamesob ken281221 ryanofsky gleb
2302019-02-07T19:01:53 <achow101> hi
2312019-02-07T19:01:54 <gkrizek> hi
2322019-02-07T19:02:01 <gwillen> buenos dias
2332019-02-07T19:02:04 <luke-jr> wat
2342019-02-07T19:02:27 <jamesob> hi
2352019-02-07T19:02:49 <wumpus> PSA feature freeze for 0.18 is next week #14438
2362019-02-07T19:02:50 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14438 | Release schedule for 0.18.0 · Issue #14438 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2372019-02-07T19:03:33 <wumpus> probably makes sense to discuss what will be ready for merge this week, as that should be prioritized for review
2382019-02-07T19:03:37 <promag> hi
2392019-02-07T19:03:51 <moneyball> hi - no proposedtopics from the week
2402019-02-07T19:03:59 <wumpus> moneyball: thanks
2412019-02-07T19:04:19 <instagibbs> hi
2422019-02-07T19:04:22 <dongcarl> #14856 has had lots of review
2432019-02-07T19:04:23 <wumpus> #topic 0.18 last-minute features
2442019-02-07T19:04:24 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14856 | net: remove more CConnman globals (theuni) by dongcarl · Pull Request #14856 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2452019-02-07T19:04:25 <jtimon> hi
2462019-02-07T19:04:34 <wumpus> dongcarl: that's not a feature tho
2472019-02-07T19:04:41 * dongcarl ducks
2482019-02-07T19:04:43 <dongcarl> true
2492019-02-07T19:05:35 <wumpus> so there's some feature PRs both in the 0.18.0 tag and high priority for review
2502019-02-07T19:05:38 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+project%3Abitcoin%2Fbitcoin%2F8
2512019-02-07T19:05:48 <wumpus> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+milestone%3A0.18.0
2522019-02-07T19:06:06 <wumpus> I guess most are related to the wallet
2532019-02-07T19:06:20 <wumpus> and the importmulti descriptor imports
2542019-02-07T19:06:30 <wumpus> oh ofc that's wallet too :<
2552019-02-07T19:06:43 <luke-jr> XD
2562019-02-07T19:06:58 <achow101> it would be nice for that to be merged. and blank wallets
2572019-02-07T19:07:26 <wumpus> so yes, wallet, what will be ready for merge this week? maybe you can weigh in meshcollider?
2582019-02-07T19:08:05 <wumpus> i see #15153 has a tested ACK
2592019-02-07T19:08:05 *** EagleTM has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
2602019-02-07T19:08:07 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15153 | gui: Add Open Wallet menu by promag · Pull Request #15153 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2612019-02-07T19:09:10 <wumpus> #15226 too
2622019-02-07T19:09:13 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15226 | Allow creating blank (empty) wallets (alternative) by achow101 · Pull Request #15226 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2632019-02-07T19:09:24 <wumpus> so I suppose they can be merged soon
2642019-02-07T19:10:21 <wumpus> #14491 even seems ready for merge
2652019-02-07T19:10:23 <phantomcircuit> hi
2662019-02-07T19:10:25 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14491 | Allow descriptor imports with importmulti by MeshCollider · Pull Request #14491 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2672019-02-07T19:11:13 <wumpus> #action review last-minute wallet feature PRs for 0.18
2682019-02-07T19:12:57 <promag> if 15153 goes then #15195 and #15204 should probably go too - but these are simpler
2692019-02-07T19:12:59 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15195 | gui: Add Close Wallet action by promag · Pull Request #15195 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2702019-02-07T19:13:01 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15204 | gui: Add Open External Wallet action by promag · Pull Request #15204 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2712019-02-07T19:13:41 <wumpus> that's a lot for one week
2722019-02-07T19:14:07 <wumpus> but we'll see I guess...
2732019-02-07T19:14:10 <wumpus> any other topics?
2742019-02-07T19:14:51 <gmaxwell> (Hi)
2752019-02-07T19:15:14 <wumpus> (hi!)
2762019-02-07T19:15:18 <luke-jr> should I close https://github.com/bitcoin-core/bitcoincore.org/pull/637, or do we still want to do something for that?
2772019-02-07T19:15:46 <wumpus> #topic Advisory and full disclosure for CVE-2018-20587 on bitcoincore.org
2782019-02-07T19:16:12 <meshcollider> hi
2792019-02-07T19:16:27 <wumpus> looks like the PR is somewhat controversial
2802019-02-07T19:16:29 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
2812019-02-07T19:16:54 <gmaxwell> that seems weird to me.
2822019-02-07T19:17:11 <gmaxwell> it's an absurdly narrow corner case, not some major concern. it should get release notes.
2832019-02-07T19:17:27 <luke-jr> well, there's no fix in Core, so release notes don't really make sense
2842019-02-07T19:17:31 <luke-jr> some docs were updated tho
2852019-02-07T19:17:40 <wumpus> I tend to agree with harding though "I'm a fan of updating the documentation in the Bitcoin Core docs/ directory and putting something into the release notes instead of publishing a long blog post that basically says that using a computer not under your exclusive control is unsafe"
2862019-02-07T19:17:55 <sipa> hi!
2872019-02-07T19:17:56 <gmaxwell> requires an attacker on your local host, which 99.99999% of the time means you are boned anyways.
2882019-02-07T19:18:10 * jonasschnelli does also agree with harding
2892019-02-07T19:18:13 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: the attacker could be another unprivileged user
2902019-02-07T19:18:30 <gmaxwell> and it's also a 'vulnerablity' that is shared by virtually every other piece of software with an rpc on a non-privledged port.
2912019-02-07T19:18:30 <wumpus> gmaxwell: especially for the kind of environments that users that don't know this run
2922019-02-07T19:18:40 <luke-jr> (FWIW, #15223 is the doc/ updates)
2932019-02-07T19:18:41 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/15223 | Doc: add information about security to the JSON-RPC doc by harding · Pull Request #15223 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
2942019-02-07T19:18:55 <wumpus> e.g. if you're on windows and run everything as the same user anyhow then someone can just as well install a keylogger
2952019-02-07T19:18:59 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: yes but almost all the time multiuser OSes are vulnerable to one priv esc vuln or another.
2962019-02-07T19:19:05 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: not really, many things fail if they can't bind
2972019-02-07T19:19:51 <luke-jr> (I haven't had any negative reports from the fix in Knots, maybe I should PR that)
2982019-02-07T19:19:51 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: failing if you don't bind doesn't actually eliminate the vulnerablity here, just makes you more likely to notice (esp after you're screwed).
2992019-02-07T19:20:24 <gmaxwell> (and 'more' but not by much)
3002019-02-07T19:20:46 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: if you don't notice prior to the attack, at most they can get the walletpassphrase, which isn't a big problem if the wallet file is inaccessible
3012019-02-07T19:20:50 <wumpus> using a unix socket would eliminate the vulnerability but I think we've been through this
3022019-02-07T19:20:56 <gmaxwell> A real fix would be mutual auth and or using a unix domain socket.
3032019-02-07T19:21:25 <luke-jr> (with a bind=>failure fix)
3042019-02-07T19:21:52 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I'm not sure most JSON-RPC libraries can support those
3052019-02-07T19:22:00 <wumpus> which would be nice, but I don't think there's anything new to discuss in that regard, there's still the libevent server crap
3062019-02-07T19:22:09 <wumpus> +http
3072019-02-07T19:22:22 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: the way you'd do the attack is start a process that binds in a tight loop until it gets it. then when it gets it it listens for a walletpassphrase then shuts off. What the user will is is that their daemon crashed, and they'll restart it before digging through the logs with almost certanty.
3082019-02-07T19:22:28 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3092019-02-07T19:22:28 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MeshCollider pushed 2 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/d83d6079432c...1933e38c1a08
3102019-02-07T19:22:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 5952838 Sjors Provoost: [rpc] util: add deriveaddresses method
3112019-02-07T19:22:29 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 1933e38 MeshCollider: Merge #14667: Add deriveaddresses RPC util method
3122019-02-07T19:22:39 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3132019-02-07T19:22:40 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: indeed, which is another point that essentially everything off a privleged port is similarly 'vulnerable'.
3142019-02-07T19:23:01 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3152019-02-07T19:23:01 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MeshCollider merged pull request #14667: Add deriveaddresses RPC util method (master...2018/11/deriveaddress) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14667
3162019-02-07T19:23:05 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3172019-02-07T19:23:25 <luke-jr> annoyingly, most OSs doesn't make it practical to reserve ports [privileged or otherwise] for specific users :/
3182019-02-07T19:23:53 <luke-jr> anyway, main question is do we want to do some blog post alerting people to this? or just leave it at a doc/ probably nobody will notice?
3192019-02-07T19:24:19 <wumpus> it's possible on linux with iptables IIRC buut I'm not sure we really want to go into that rabbit hole for documentation
3202019-02-07T19:24:25 <gmaxwell> the blog post also won't be noticed, plus I'm concerned that its crying wolf -- increasing the profile of minutia.
3212019-02-07T19:24:33 <wumpus> I'm also worried of that.
3222019-02-07T19:24:45 <wumpus> most people will be able to do exactly nothing with this advisory
3232019-02-07T19:24:48 <luke-jr> wumpus: it is?
3242019-02-07T19:24:48 <gmaxwell> Like we don't have a blog post warning you about following links or whatever, which is a much greater risk to users than this.
3252019-02-07T19:25:12 <wumpus> luke-jr: yes, there's a uid filter
3262019-02-07T19:25:15 <luke-jr> okay, sounds like I should just close the PR then and leave it at that
3272019-02-07T19:25:39 <wumpus> at least there was back in the day I was still interested in using user ids for separation instead of VMs
3282019-02-07T19:25:41 <gmaxwell> If we really wanted a blog post ... maybe instead we should have a blog post about bitcoin wallet security best practices, and this port thing could be mentioned somewhere in it. that would make sense. But alerting on this? I don't think so.
3292019-02-07T19:25:42 <luke-jr> wumpus: but that can't block binding afaik? I guess if nobody can connect it's effectively the same..
3302019-02-07T19:27:14 <wumpus> ok, any other topics?
3312019-02-07T19:27:32 <sipa> short topic: descriptor checksums
3322019-02-07T19:27:43 <wumpus> #topic Descriptor checksums (sipa)
3332019-02-07T19:27:55 <sipa> so, this was discussed in the wallet meeting 1 or 2 weeks ago
3342019-02-07T19:28:25 <sipa> the idea is that if descriptors are going to be used as import, and to generate addresses, we probably want to protect against typos (or due to length more commonly, copy-paste errors)
3352019-02-07T19:28:37 <sipa> and things like keypaths and public keys are quite vulnerable to that
3362019-02-07T19:28:55 <wumpus> makes sense
3372019-02-07T19:29:00 <luke-jr> I think it might be annoying to have to calculate checksums if you enter a keypath by hand..?
3382019-02-07T19:29:28 <jonasschnelli> it may be optional
3392019-02-07T19:29:31 <sipa> i have a PR almost ready to add these (will submit today), but since deriveaddress was just merged, i think it would make sense to have these in 0.18 (as it'd otherwise an incompatible change later; scantxoutset doesn't really require checksums)
3402019-02-07T19:29:33 <jtimon> oh, there's a wallet meeting?
3412019-02-07T19:29:48 <luke-jr> jtimon: same time Friday, every other week
3422019-02-07T19:29:56 <jtimon> thanks
3432019-02-07T19:30:25 <sipa> i'm just bringing it up as a heads up here; obviously if review doesn't let us get it in 0.18, so be it
3442019-02-07T19:30:41 <luke-jr> sipa: will they be optional?
3452019-02-07T19:30:48 *** dqx has quit IRC
3462019-02-07T19:30:53 <sipa> luke-jr: for RPCs where mistakes aren't critical, yes
3472019-02-07T19:30:55 <wumpus> it is very last minute considering there's many other wallet PRs that are tagged 0.18, but sure it'd be nice
3482019-02-07T19:30:56 *** Krellan_ has quit IRC
3492019-02-07T19:30:58 <luke-jr> and can you (eg) have checksums on the keys, but not the paths?
3502019-02-07T19:31:14 <sipa> no, you'd need a tool or RPC to recompute the checksum
3512019-02-07T19:31:18 <luke-jr> :/
3522019-02-07T19:31:34 <sipa> my thinking is that for most things where you're just "playing" with them, they're optional
3532019-02-07T19:31:37 <achow101> luke-jr: keys would still be checksummed becaused of base58
3542019-02-07T19:32:00 <meshcollider> sipa: how large of a PR is it?
3552019-02-07T19:32:06 *** dqx has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3562019-02-07T19:32:12 <sipa> meshcollider: not big, very localized
3572019-02-07T19:32:22 <meshcollider> thats good, I think we could get it in then
3582019-02-07T19:32:37 <wumpus> good, at least it won't interfere with the others then
3592019-02-07T19:32:48 <sipa> but when importing (which isn't merged yet), the checksum would be mandatory (or there could be a flag to disable that, if people like that...)
3602019-02-07T19:33:14 <meshcollider> is it based on #14491 then?
3612019-02-07T19:33:16 <achow101> I think there should be a flag to make them optional
3622019-02-07T19:33:17 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14491 | Allow descriptor imports with importmulti by MeshCollider · Pull Request #14491 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3632019-02-07T19:33:18 <jonasschnelli> skipping the checksum on RPC level is probably acceptable
3642019-02-07T19:33:32 <sipa> meshcollider: no, but it'd be a one-line change to integrate
3652019-02-07T19:33:45 <meshcollider> awesome
3662019-02-07T19:33:47 <luke-jr> almost certainly the response to mandatory checksum will probably be to just calculate it :x
3672019-02-07T19:33:59 <luke-jr> probably enough to just make sure if it is present and doesn't match, it fails
3682019-02-07T19:34:10 <sipa> luke-jr: that's perhaps true... but it's the best we can do
3692019-02-07T19:36:01 <sipa> end topic
3702019-02-07T19:36:03 <gwillen> we should avoid ever creating / displaying one without a checksum ourselves
3712019-02-07T19:36:35 <sipa> gwillen: yes, my PR adds the checksum in the text serialization code; it's optional just in the parser
3722019-02-07T19:36:43 <gwillen> :+1:
3732019-02-07T19:36:55 *** michaelsdunn1 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3742019-02-07T19:37:03 <sipa> (no point in discussing this here; will open the PR as soon as a few tests are fixed)
3752019-02-07T19:37:35 <wumpus> more topics?
3762019-02-07T19:37:50 <jl2012> hi
3772019-02-07T19:38:02 <jonasschnelli> I have just a little reminder...
3782019-02-07T19:38:09 <jl2012> #13360
3792019-02-07T19:38:12 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13360 | [Policy] Reject SIGHASH_SINGLE with output out of bound by jl2012 · Pull Request #13360 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3802019-02-07T19:38:20 <jonasschnelli> we should finally add older wallet tests
3812019-02-07T19:38:38 <jonasschnelli> with growing states (blank wallets, disable private key, hd non hd)
3822019-02-07T19:38:59 <jonasschnelli> I mean function tests that test stuff with wallets from older bitcoin core versions
3832019-02-07T19:39:11 <wumpus> #topic old wallet tests
3842019-02-07T19:39:14 <jonasschnelli> Or we will certainly break stuff in the near future
3852019-02-07T19:39:43 *** riemann_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3862019-02-07T19:39:44 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
3872019-02-07T19:39:45 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] MarcoFalke opened pull request #15365: wallet: Add lock annotation for mapAddressBook (master...Mf1902-LockAnnotmapAddressBook) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15365
3882019-02-07T19:39:48 <jonasschnelli> I think MarcoFalke once made an issue: #14536
3892019-02-07T19:39:49 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
3902019-02-07T19:39:49 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/14536 | functional test with ancient wallet.dat (upgrade test) · Issue #14536 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
3912019-02-07T19:40:08 *** riemann_ has quit IRC
3922019-02-07T19:41:04 <jonasschnelli> So if someone is interested to write some tests against older wallets and eventually just use static older wallet files,.... your welcome
3932019-02-07T19:41:38 <jonasschnelli> The other route would be compiling older Bitcoin Core versions and use that as base for file interoperability tests (including levelDb upgrades, etc.)
3942019-02-07T19:41:48 *** shesek has quit IRC
3952019-02-07T19:42:16 <jonasschnelli> sorry,... I meant chainstate database upgrade (not levelDB upgrades)
3962019-02-07T19:42:21 <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: that complicates testing, which might be fine for extended tests, but I think wallet tests would be better as an "always run"
3972019-02-07T19:42:30 <MarcoFalke> The wallet file could be added to https://github.com/bitcoin-core/qa-assets in case core-repo-bloat is a concern
3982019-02-07T19:42:46 <jnewbery> Sjors has a PR for using older versions in testing: #12134
3992019-02-07T19:42:49 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/12134 | Build previous releases and run functional tests by Sjors · Pull Request #12134 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4002019-02-07T19:42:50 <luke-jr> I wouldn't think a simple old wallet would be that large
4012019-02-07T19:43:02 <jonasschnelli> Probably,... but a couple of older wallet.dats in as test statics would not be completely wrong IMO
4022019-02-07T19:43:27 <jnewbery> I think it's a nice idea, but the instability of the interfaces and testing framework means it'll be quite an effort to maintain going forward
4032019-02-07T19:43:28 <luke-jr> I guess an ideal test would make an old wallet, load it in a new version, do stuff, then make sure the old version still works
4042019-02-07T19:43:33 <luke-jr> but that's getting complex
4052019-02-07T19:43:38 <jonasschnelli> I don't care where they are stored but we should finally add tests
4062019-02-07T19:43:51 *** EagleTM has quit IRC
4072019-02-07T19:44:16 <jnewbery> I think the idea of having old wallet files in the tests is more maintainable
4082019-02-07T19:44:17 <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: thats another tests that would certenly required to compile older version of Core
4092019-02-07T19:45:09 <wumpus> I'm not too happy with the idea of adding wallet.dat's to the repository
4102019-02-07T19:45:11 *** watchtower has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4112019-02-07T19:45:30 <MarcoFalke> wumpus: seen my reply above?
4122019-02-07T19:45:47 <wumpus> MarcoFalke: no I missed that, :+1: to that
4132019-02-07T19:46:00 <jonasschnelli> wumpus: we could rename them to static.dump *duck*
4142019-02-07T19:46:06 <gwillen> one could manually construct wallet.dats without keypool for testing, yeah? So they don't need to be very large?
4152019-02-07T19:46:21 <gwillen> unless that itself would break or fail to test important stuff.
4162019-02-07T19:46:22 <MarcoFalke> I don't think there is anything to discuss here. It just needs someone to create some wallet.dats and write the test
4172019-02-07T19:46:33 <jonasschnelli> jup. agree
4182019-02-07T19:46:37 <jtimon> since this is for testing, can't we just download older versions from https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/releases ?
4192019-02-07T19:46:38 <wumpus> yes-
4202019-02-07T19:46:46 <jonasschnelli> that's why I labeled it as "reminder".
4212019-02-07T19:46:51 <MarcoFalke> heh
4222019-02-07T19:46:53 <jonasschnelli> Create blank wallets will be merged soon
4232019-02-07T19:47:03 <luke-jr> jonasschnelli: or have it available anyway
4242019-02-07T19:47:27 <luke-jr> wumpus: what about Python maps of key/values that get shoved in a BDB db manually? :P
4252019-02-07T19:47:44 <jonasschnelli> luke-jr: thats not authentic enough IMO
4262019-02-07T19:48:24 <MarcoFalke> Jup, we really need a wallet.dat before every feature-bump in Bitcoin Core
4272019-02-07T19:48:36 <jtimon> well, that would still be better than nothing, I guess
4282019-02-07T19:49:45 <wumpus> any more topics?
4292019-02-07T19:50:00 <jl2012> I'd like to have some concept ACK and review for #13360, which makes out-of-bound SIGHASH_SINGLE non-standard.
4302019-02-07T19:50:02 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13360 | [Policy] Reject SIGHASH_SINGLE with output out of bound by jl2012 · Pull Request #13360 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4312019-02-07T19:50:16 <jl2012> this could become a softfork someday
4322019-02-07T19:50:42 <wumpus> #topic out-of-bound SIGHASH_SINGLE (jl2012)
4332019-02-07T19:50:46 <luke-jr> jl2012: ltns. What's the benefit though?
4342019-02-07T19:51:27 <jl2012> luke-jr: to avoid losing money by accident
4352019-02-07T19:51:55 <luke-jr> ah, so it's more for local sendrawtx than for relaying
4362019-02-07T19:52:13 <jl2012> in legacy script, signing with out-of-bound SINGLE is almost like revealing your private key
4372019-02-07T19:52:26 *** afk11 has quit IRC
4382019-02-07T19:52:28 <luke-jr> (I'm not sure it makes sense to do a softfork for that reason though)
4392019-02-07T19:52:34 <luke-jr> it's like absurd fee
4402019-02-07T19:52:54 <jl2012> fee is a feature, but this thing is clearly a bug
4412019-02-07T19:53:26 <luke-jr> jl2012: IIRC, it has been proposed to use it, in the past
4422019-02-07T19:53:37 <wumpus> I'm also not sure it makes sense to do a softfork for this, if you're afraid of users doing this then it indeed makes sense to add it on submitrawtransaction
4432019-02-07T19:54:05 <luke-jr> I believe the feature in that case, was that the signature was smaller than a normal one
4442019-02-07T19:54:14 <luke-jr> (the goal was to clean dust UTXOs)
4452019-02-07T19:54:36 <instagibbs> luke-jr, only example I knpw of :P https://underhandedcrypto.com/2016/08/17/the-2016-backdoored-cryptocurrency-contest-winner/
4462019-02-07T19:54:39 <jl2012> how smaller? It's still 72 bytes or so
4472019-02-07T19:54:55 <wumpus> I mean there's tons of ways to lose money with raw transactions, it is user friendly to try to protect this on RPC, but I'm not sure it merits changing the consensus rules... but that's just me
4482019-02-07T19:54:56 <luke-jr> or maybe it was compressability? I'm not sure
4492019-02-07T19:54:59 <jl2012> you can use SIGHASH_NONE for donating dust
4502019-02-07T19:55:27 <luke-jr> wumpus: +1
4512019-02-07T19:55:32 <gmaxwell> achow101: I don't think there should be a flag to make them optional, instead just have a command that adds/fixes them.
4522019-02-07T19:56:03 <gmaxwell> achow101: so then you're not peppering every interface with a flag, and also don't run into people just setting the flag all the time "because thats how you do it"
4532019-02-07T19:56:07 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: I think yuo had suggested some "privkey gets compromised" dust cleaning thing - was that this?
4542019-02-07T19:56:50 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: sorry, missing the context
4552019-02-07T19:57:02 <jl2012> luke-jr: I guess you mean that's cheaper to validate, as you don't need to hash it
4562019-02-07T19:57:21 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: [19:50:00] <jl2012> I'd like to have some concept ACK and review for #13360, which makes out-of-bound SIGHASH_SINGLE non-standard.
4572019-02-07T19:57:23 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13360 | [Policy] Reject SIGHASH_SINGLE with output out of bound by jl2012 · Pull Request #13360 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4582019-02-07T19:57:32 <jl2012> but using ANYONECANPAY|NONE would not be too bad
4592019-02-07T19:57:33 <gmaxwell> I think we should get rid of sighash single, not to protect users (the UI does that), but because it's a constant hazard in consensus rules.
4602019-02-07T19:58:10 <wumpus> get rid of SIGHASH_SINGLE completely?
4612019-02-07T19:58:10 <gmaxwell> Twice now I've gone through some horror of thinking some interaction of consensus rules/ecdsa would make all funds trivially stealable but only to be saved by dumb luck.
4622019-02-07T19:58:17 <gmaxwell> no, the bug.
4632019-02-07T19:58:33 <gmaxwell> Single itself is fine, sorry-- but the single bug is a hazard.
4642019-02-07T19:58:43 <gmaxwell> it's also not actually useful.
4652019-02-07T19:58:45 <gmaxwell> Nor used.
4662019-02-07T19:58:54 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: a few years ago, you had a way to reduce block space used in dust cleanup, but in a way that compromised the privkey - was that related to this?
4672019-02-07T19:59:21 <gmaxwell> luke-jr: It just used a nonce with an usually small nonce. Using the single bug didn't make the txn any smaller.
4682019-02-07T19:59:27 <luke-jr> k
4692019-02-07T19:59:51 <gmaxwell> (though may have made them somewhat more gzippable, but not more compressable with a format aware compressor)
4702019-02-07T20:00:40 <wumpus> #endmeeting
4712019-02-07T20:00:40 <lightningbot> Meeting ended Thu Feb 7 20:00:40 2019 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4)
4722019-02-07T20:00:40 <lightningbot> Minutes: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-02-07-19.01.html
4732019-02-07T20:00:40 <lightningbot> Minutes (text): http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-02-07-19.01.txt
4742019-02-07T20:00:40 <lightningbot> Log: http://www.erisian.com.au/meetbot/bitcoin-core-dev/2019/bitcoin-core-dev.2019-02-07-19.01.log.html
4752019-02-07T20:01:10 <gwillen> achow101: friendly poke on #13932 :-)
4762019-02-07T20:01:13 <gribble> https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues/13932 | Additional utility RPCs for PSBT by achow101 · Pull Request #13932 · bitcoin/bitcoin · GitHub
4772019-02-07T20:01:22 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4782019-02-07T20:01:32 <luke-jr> anyway, sounds like the policy change is a clear concept ACK, and softfork is at least something to consider later
4792019-02-07T20:01:44 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
4802019-02-07T20:02:18 <gmaxwell> An example, of one of the times I went through some horror. It's trivial to forge an ECDSA signature of the hash '0' with any pubkey... I realized this when I was AFK and thought single signed 0 instead of 1... if it did, every coin would have been stealable.
4812019-02-07T20:03:03 <gmaxwell> also, I think we already 'ruled' on the single bug being useful or not-- we didn't keep it in segwit.
4822019-02-07T20:03:12 <achow101> gwillen: what needs to be done on it?
4832019-02-07T20:03:34 <jl2012> gmaxwell: well, it's still in segwit, just not in a replayable style
4842019-02-07T20:03:36 <luke-jr> gmaxwell: saved by a bit ;)
4852019-02-07T20:04:02 <jl2012> in BIP143, out-of-bound SINGLE is treated like NONE
4862019-02-07T20:04:13 <gmaxwell> Right, it only signs that transaction.
4872019-02-07T20:04:56 <gmaxwell> And if by some cosmic wtf someone comes up with some application for it, it could always be introduced in a new script version.
4882019-02-07T20:05:07 <luke-jr> (yay script versions)
4892019-02-07T20:06:20 <gwillen> achow101: I left a few comments but I'd consider them nits -- should I be poking reviewers instead?
4902019-02-07T20:06:22 <gmaxwell> as far as concrete benefits beyond simplifying security analysis... it's one less case for a sighashcache to handle. (which I think was 95% of what caused it to come up)
4912019-02-07T20:06:28 *** Murch has quit IRC
4922019-02-07T20:06:33 <gwillen> achow101: or who do you think would ultimately be merging it?
4932019-02-07T20:07:30 <achow101> gwillen: right now it's waiting on reviewers
4942019-02-07T20:07:49 <achow101> i don't think there is much I can do
4952019-02-07T20:07:56 *** watchtower has quit IRC
4962019-02-07T20:08:15 <gwillen> ok, I guess I can hassle people to review at the wallet meeting tomorrow
4972019-02-07T20:08:19 <gwillen> do take a look at my comments?
4982019-02-07T20:08:23 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
4992019-02-07T20:08:37 <achow101> sure
5002019-02-07T20:08:38 <wumpus> probably a good idea!s
5012019-02-07T20:10:44 <jl2012> gmaxwell: I don't think the SINGLE bug would affect sighash caching? If it is out-of-bound, it's always out-of-bound for the same input
5022019-02-07T20:11:59 *** benthecarman has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5032019-02-07T20:12:42 *** promag has quit IRC
5042019-02-07T20:12:45 <kanzure> late hi
5052019-02-07T20:13:09 <meshcollider> kanzure: you missed the whole meeting :p
5062019-02-07T20:15:03 <kanzure> time zones..
5072019-02-07T20:15:28 <gmaxwell> jl2012: right, but it's still an extra case to branch on that has to be tested.
5082019-02-07T20:23:40 <jl2012> gmaxwell: the trick to make smaller signature is using R = G^0.5 ?
5092019-02-07T20:24:16 *** jtimon has quit IRC
5102019-02-07T20:25:33 <benthecarman> Hey, so I am making a PR to add an option to give the user the ability to have commands run after Bitcoin Core is finished starting up, the idea is so someone could have things like lnd or electrum-personal-server automatically run when Bitcoin Core starts. Is this something desirable to add or could it be too unsafe?
5112019-02-07T20:25:36 <gmaxwell> jl2012: yes, it makes r serialize 10 bytes smaller.
5122019-02-07T20:25:39 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5132019-02-07T20:26:21 <jl2012> related discussion: https://crypto.stackexchange.com/questions/60420/what-does-the-special-form-of-the-base-point-of-secp256k1-allow
5142019-02-07T20:26:25 <gmaxwell> benthecarman: that doesn't seem crazy (or at least not any more crazy than the 'notify' commands... But why not just start lnd or eps at the same time-- presumably they'll just keep trying to reconnect, no?
5152019-02-07T20:26:56 <jl2012> so G is clearly not a random choice. Who choose that and why?
5162019-02-07T20:27:27 <jl2012> it seems not answered
5172019-02-07T20:27:57 <benthecarman> gmaxwell: my thinking was that you don't need to add all those to your automatic startup or have to run anything extra and bitcoin core can set it up for you
5182019-02-07T20:28:14 <sipa> jl2012: there is a very old bct thread about that, from someone who contacted certicom about the origins of the curve
5192019-02-07T20:28:31 *** DeanGuss has quit IRC
5202019-02-07T20:29:07 <gmaxwell> jl2012: it's not, (AFAIK, I'm the one who discovered that it isn't...) but it's largely irrelevant. e.g. its trivial to prove that any 'weak' point makes all points weak.
5212019-02-07T20:29:34 <gmaxwell> jl2012: I can tell you how I discovered it, which is suggestive as to how it might have been selected that way.
5222019-02-07T20:31:11 *** hebasto has quit IRC
5232019-02-07T20:34:34 <gmaxwell> jl2012: We had theorized that libsecp256k1's generator was was the output of some hash, but had no luck at finding a match (somee standards had hashes of the designers kids dates of birth or similar for choosing g)... In unrelated work on libsecp256k1 we wanted an easily generated NUMS point for blinding some operations in libsecp256k1... so like take a dumb string or a hash and treat it as a
5242019-02-07T20:34:34 <gmaxwell> point. Then it seemed useful to perform some operation on it to randomize the bits. The only operation you can do with just a single point and nothing is double it... which does a pretty good job of making the resulting values look 'random'.
5252019-02-07T20:35:10 <gmaxwell> jl2012: so I thought maybe the designer of this curve had taken a hash as a point and doubled it... so I havled G and found a surprisingly small value.
5262019-02-07T20:36:21 <gmaxwell> FWIW secp224k1 uses the same constant.
5272019-02-07T20:39:18 <jl2012> oh, btw, I have a related idea: in the new schnorr sig checking, if the signature size is 32 bytes, we check if it is the correct private key. This should be the cheapest way to donate dust
5282019-02-07T20:41:06 <gmaxwell> I had that thought too, fwiw.-- during the above disussion, but ISTM it's such a corner case that I dunno if it's worth doing.
5292019-02-07T20:45:23 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5302019-02-07T20:45:23 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] benthecarman opened pull request #15367: feature: Added ability for users to add a startup command (master...startup_commands) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15367
5312019-02-07T20:45:25 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5322019-02-07T20:45:37 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
5332019-02-07T20:45:49 <jl2012> if we will have some kind of EC MATH opcodes in the future, there is probably not much marginal cost to support this
5342019-02-07T20:47:12 *** pinheadmz has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5352019-02-07T20:48:03 *** benthecarman has quit IRC
5362019-02-07T20:49:30 *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
5372019-02-07T20:52:25 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5382019-02-07T20:52:25 *** shesek has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5392019-02-07T20:56:54 *** Murch has quit IRC
5402019-02-07T20:57:29 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5412019-02-07T20:58:55 *** Emcy has quit IRC
5422019-02-07T21:02:50 *** Murch has quit IRC
5432019-02-07T21:03:17 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5442019-02-07T21:05:04 *** Emcy has quit IRC
5452019-02-07T21:08:06 *** Emcy has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5462019-02-07T21:08:10 *** jtimon has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5472019-02-07T21:10:09 *** ap4lmtree has quit IRC
5482019-02-07T21:25:09 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5492019-02-07T21:27:23 *** bralyclow has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5502019-02-07T21:30:28 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
5512019-02-07T21:55:16 *** spaced0ut has quit IRC
5522019-02-07T21:57:47 *** Krellan has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5532019-02-07T22:02:25 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5542019-02-07T22:02:27 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj pushed 7 commits to master: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/compare/1933e38c1a08...9127bd7abaf8
5552019-02-07T22:02:27 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master a1b25e1 John Newbery: [wallet] Refactor ProcessImport()
5562019-02-07T22:02:27 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master 4cac0dd John Newbery: [wallet] Add ProcessImportLegacy()
5572019-02-07T22:02:28 <bitcoin-git> bitcoin/master d2b381c John Newbery: [wallet] Refactor ProcessImport() to call ProcessImportLegacy()
5582019-02-07T22:02:37 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5592019-02-07T22:04:37 <instagibbs> \o/
5602019-02-07T22:05:00 <instagibbs> Only a couple PRs away from running master again :P
5612019-02-07T22:05:34 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5622019-02-07T22:05:34 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] laanwj merged pull request #14491: Allow descriptor imports with importmulti (master...201810_importmulti_desc_2) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/14491
5632019-02-07T22:05:35 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5642019-02-07T22:05:37 *** promag has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5652019-02-07T22:08:30 <achow101> \o/
5662019-02-07T22:09:56 *** elichai2 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5672019-02-07T22:18:17 *** hyperion has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5682019-02-07T22:18:40 *** spinza has quit IRC
5692019-02-07T22:19:27 *** Guyver2 has quit IRC
5702019-02-07T22:28:02 *** spinza has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5712019-02-07T22:32:02 *** Murch has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5722019-02-07T22:36:23 *** ap4lmtree has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5732019-02-07T22:40:30 *** jimmysong has quit IRC
5742019-02-07T22:40:30 *** jimmysong__ has quit IRC
5752019-02-07T22:44:46 *** jimmysong has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5762019-02-07T22:44:47 *** jimmysong_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5772019-02-07T23:05:12 *** promag has quit IRC
5782019-02-07T23:07:36 *** TX1683 has quit IRC
5792019-02-07T23:10:27 *** ddustin_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5802019-02-07T23:12:11 *** michaels_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5812019-02-07T23:12:41 *** kexkey has quit IRC
5822019-02-07T23:12:53 *** michaels_ has quit IRC
5832019-02-07T23:14:05 *** ddustin has quit IRC
5842019-02-07T23:14:16 *** Cory has quit IRC
5852019-02-07T23:16:01 *** rh0nj has quit IRC
5862019-02-07T23:16:42 *** TX1683 has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5872019-02-07T23:16:54 *** bitcoin-git has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5882019-02-07T23:16:55 <bitcoin-git> [bitcoin] sipa opened pull request #15368: Descriptor checksums (master...201902_descsum) https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/15368
5892019-02-07T23:17:03 *** bitcoin-git has left #bitcoin-core-dev
5902019-02-07T23:17:08 *** rh0nj has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5912019-02-07T23:20:22 *** Pasha has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5922019-02-07T23:23:33 *** Pasha is now known as Cory
5932019-02-07T23:27:16 *** AaronvanW has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5942019-02-07T23:27:46 *** Zenton has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5952019-02-07T23:33:54 *** AaronvanW has quit IRC
5962019-02-07T23:40:06 *** Krellan has quit IRC
5972019-02-07T23:47:22 *** bralyclo_ has joined #bitcoin-core-dev
5982019-02-07T23:50:47 *** bralyclow has quit IRC