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