1 2019-12-05T00:11:52  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
  2 2019-12-05T00:41:41  *** pinheadmz has quit IRC
  3 2019-12-05T00:46:19  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
  4 2019-12-05T01:06:24  <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?
  5 2019-12-05T01:07:04  <sipa> no
  6 2019-12-05T01:07:48  <aj> nope, missed sending the email; the content's at https://github.com/ajtowns/taproot-review/blob/master/week-5.md
  7 2019-12-05T01:33:17  *** arik_ has quit IRC
  8 2019-12-05T02:03:50  *** davterra has quit IRC
  9 2019-12-05T02:05:41  *** davterra has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 10 2019-12-05T02:11:39  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
 11 2019-12-05T02:16:11  <sipa> no second Q&A session this week, i guess?
 12 2019-12-05T02:16:15  * sipa is here
 13 2019-12-05T02:21:23  <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"
 14 2019-12-05T02:27:24  <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
 15 2019-12-05T02:37:59  <gmaxwell> I think it's harder to get a comprehensive review without also reviewing the implementation, which this process wasn't doing.
 16 2019-12-05T02:38:54  <sipa> yeah, i think that kind of yay/nay (if needed at all) is for a later stage
 17 2019-12-05T02:39:06  <aj> should get bip numbers assigned first, and i think we want to improve the implementation before heavy review of it?
 18 2019-12-05T02:39:28  <sipa> the tests need improvement
 19 2019-12-05T02:39:46  <sipa> otherwise i'm (personally) pretty happy with the code already
 20 2019-12-05T02:40:00  <aj> oh, that's great
 21 2019-12-05T02:40:15  <gmaxwell> sipa: right, but I think people haven't been looking at the implementation (at least not as part of this process)
 22 2019-12-05T02:40:25  <sipa> gmaxwell: yes, i've been actively suggesting not to
 23 2019-12-05T02:40:36  <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
 24 2019-12-05T02:40:48  <aj> but the tests are hard :(
 25 2019-12-05T02:41:50  <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?
 26 2019-12-05T02:42:17  <sipa> possibly, yes - or non-encodable versions could use non-length-32 ;)
 27 2019-12-05T02:42:37  <aj> non-length 20 and 0x20 ?
 28 2019-12-05T02:42:41  <sipa> yeah
 29 2019-12-05T02:42:55  <gmaxwell> oh good point.
 30 2019-12-05T02:43:17  <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
 31 2019-12-05T02:43:42  <sipa> things that we actually expect on-chain should be prioritized to be given 32-byte outputs (without other marker bytes)
 32 2019-12-05T02:44:19  <sipa> as there are only 16 of them
 33 2019-12-05T02:44:32  <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)
 34 2019-12-05T02:46:19  <gmaxwell> Sure, 4wu is not the end of the world in any case.
 35 2019-12-05T02:48:36  <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
 36 2019-12-05T02:50:32  <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
 37 2019-12-05T02:56:49  <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
 38 2019-12-05T02:56:59  <sipa> *completely
 39 2019-12-05T03:00:22  <gmaxwell> right, my only point is that aj's yea/ney suggestions need to have the benefit of people having looked at an implementation.
 40 2019-12-05T03:06:32  <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?
 41 2019-12-05T03:23:14  <sipa> yeah
 42 2019-12-05T03:24:08  *** ZmnSCPxj has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 43 2019-12-05T03:25:45  *** ZmnSCPxj_ has quit IRC
 44 2019-12-05T04:11:41  *** ZmnSCPxj has quit IRC
 45 2019-12-05T04:25:36  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 46 2019-12-05T04:50:44  *** pinheadmz has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 47 2019-12-05T05:00:52  *** arik_ has quit IRC
 48 2019-12-05T05:15:08  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 49 2019-12-05T05:36:37  *** sipa has quit IRC
 50 2019-12-05T05:36:38  *** afk11 has quit IRC
 51 2019-12-05T05:37:05  *** _andrewtoth_ has quit IRC
 52 2019-12-05T05:38:26  *** arik_ has quit IRC
 53 2019-12-05T05:57:26  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 54 2019-12-05T06:03:44  *** afk11 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 55 2019-12-05T06:58:16  *** Kiminuo has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 56 2019-12-05T07:06:22  *** arik_ has quit IRC
 57 2019-12-05T07:10:41  *** kabaum has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 58 2019-12-05T07:36:40  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 59 2019-12-05T08:07:42  *** arik_ has quit IRC
 60 2019-12-05T08:34:40  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
 61 2019-12-05T08:38:16  *** gmaxwell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 62 2019-12-05T08:57:54  *** b10c has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 63 2019-12-05T09:01:06  *** Kiminuo2 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 64 2019-12-05T09:02:23  *** Kiminuo has quit IRC
 65 2019-12-05T09:19:04  *** ZmnSCPxj has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 66 2019-12-05T09:54:39  *** gmaxwell has quit IRC
 67 2019-12-05T09:54:40  *** real_or_random has quit IRC
 68 2019-12-05T09:54:40  *** pipirell1 has quit IRC
 69 2019-12-05T09:54:41  *** ZmnSCPxj has quit IRC
 70 2019-12-05T09:54:41  *** kabaum has quit IRC
 71 2019-12-05T09:54:42  *** jonatack has quit IRC
 72 2019-12-05T09:54:42  *** andytoshi has quit IRC
 73 2019-12-05T09:54:42  *** sanket1729 has quit IRC
 74 2019-12-05T09:54:52  *** Murch has quit IRC
 75 2019-12-05T09:54:53  *** Lexyon__ has quit IRC
 76 2019-12-05T09:54:54  *** philbw4 has quit IRC
 77 2019-12-05T09:54:55  *** kanzure has quit IRC
 78 2019-12-05T09:54:55  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
 79 2019-12-05T09:54:57  *** davterra has quit IRC
 80 2019-12-05T09:54:59  *** rottensox has quit IRC
 81 2019-12-05T09:55:00  *** ariard has quit IRC
 82 2019-12-05T09:55:01  *** raj_149 has quit IRC
 83 2019-12-05T09:55:02  *** belcher has quit IRC
 84 2019-12-05T09:55:02  *** orlovsky has quit IRC
 85 2019-12-05T09:55:04  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
 86 2019-12-05T09:55:04  *** dr_orlovsky has quit IRC
 87 2019-12-05T09:55:05  *** hebasto has quit IRC
 88 2019-12-05T09:55:07  *** chm-diederichs has quit IRC
 89 2019-12-05T09:55:07  *** cdecker has quit IRC
 90 2019-12-05T09:55:07  *** nothingmuch has quit IRC
 91 2019-12-05T09:55:08  *** nehan has quit IRC
 92 2019-12-05T09:55:17  *** so has quit IRC
 93 2019-12-05T09:56:24  *** Murch has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 94 2019-12-05T09:56:24  *** Lexyon__ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 95 2019-12-05T09:56:24  *** kanzure has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 96 2019-12-05T09:56:24  *** philbw4 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 97 2019-12-05T09:56:24  *** RubenSomsen has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 98 2019-12-05T09:59:48  *** davterra has joined ##taproot-bip-review
 99 2019-12-05T09:59:48  *** rottensox has joined ##taproot-bip-review
100 2019-12-05T09:59:48  *** ariard has joined ##taproot-bip-review
101 2019-12-05T09:59:48  *** raj_149 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
102 2019-12-05T10:00:26  *** Murch has quit IRC
103 2019-12-05T10:00:27  *** Lexyon__ has quit IRC
104 2019-12-05T10:00:28  *** philbw4 has quit IRC
105 2019-12-05T10:00:28  *** kanzure has quit IRC
106 2019-12-05T10:00:29  *** RubenSomsen has quit IRC
107 2019-12-05T10:01:30  *** Murch has joined ##taproot-bip-review
108 2019-12-05T10:01:30  *** Lexyon__ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
109 2019-12-05T10:01:30  *** kanzure has joined ##taproot-bip-review
110 2019-12-05T10:01:30  *** philbw4 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
111 2019-12-05T10:01:30  *** RubenSomsen has joined ##taproot-bip-review
112 2019-12-05T10:01:53  *** ZmnSCPxj has joined ##taproot-bip-review
113 2019-12-05T10:01:53  *** kabaum has joined ##taproot-bip-review
114 2019-12-05T10:01:53  *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
115 2019-12-05T10:01:53  *** sanket1729 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
116 2019-12-05T10:03:43  *** so has joined ##taproot-bip-review
117 2019-12-05T10:03:49  *** gmaxwell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
118 2019-12-05T10:03:57  *** real_or_random has joined ##taproot-bip-review
119 2019-12-05T10:03:57  *** pipirell1 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
120 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
121 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
122 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** nehan has joined ##taproot-bip-review
123 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** elichai2 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
124 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** dr_orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
125 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** hebasto has joined ##taproot-bip-review
126 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** chm-diederichs has joined ##taproot-bip-review
127 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** nothingmuch has joined ##taproot-bip-review
128 2019-12-05T10:04:20  *** cdecker has joined ##taproot-bip-review
129 2019-12-05T10:07:53  *** elichai2 has quit IRC
130 2019-12-05T10:09:06  *** elichai2 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
131 2019-12-05T10:23:21  *** belcher has quit IRC
132 2019-12-05T10:52:04  *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
133 2019-12-05T11:08:55  *** orlovsky has quit IRC
134 2019-12-05T11:16:08  *** belcher has quit IRC
135 2019-12-05T11:25:01  *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
136 2019-12-05T11:34:59  *** andytoshi has quit IRC
137 2019-12-05T11:54:57  *** Kiminuo2 has quit IRC
138 2019-12-05T12:36:58  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
139 2019-12-05T13:01:45  *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
140 2019-12-05T13:02:57  *** ZmnSCPxj has quit IRC
141 2019-12-05T14:02:09  <instagibbs> kind of helps to not look at code so people demand clarity from the bips, at least at this stage
142 2019-12-05T14:16:18  *** andytoshi has quit IRC
143 2019-12-05T14:16:32  *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
144 2019-12-05T14:16:32  *** andytoshi has joined ##taproot-bip-review
145 2019-12-05T14:24:46  *** _andrewtoth_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
146 2019-12-05T14:32:56  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
147 2019-12-05T14:37:13  *** pyskell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
148 2019-12-05T14:48:42  *** pyskell has quit IRC
149 2019-12-05T15:09:31  *** arik_ has quit IRC
150 2019-12-05T15:11:57  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
151 2019-12-05T15:16:56  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
152 2019-12-05T16:07:06  *** jonatack has joined ##taproot-bip-review
153 2019-12-05T16:27:05  <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.
154 2019-12-05T16:27:37  <waxwing> gave an example here: https://x0f.org/web/statuses/102897691888130818 although for those in the know i realise it's trivial.
155 2019-12-05T16:28:10  <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.
156 2019-12-05T16:28:35  <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 :)
157 2019-12-05T16:39:28  *** dr-orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
158 2019-12-05T16:48:16  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
159 2019-12-05T16:59:02  *** dr-orlovsky has quit IRC
160 2019-12-05T17:19:33  <instagibbs> it doesn't say it's a secure signature ;)
161 2019-12-05T17:21:40  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
162 2019-12-05T17:25:57  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
163 2019-12-05T17:28:57  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has joined ##taproot-bip-review
164 2019-12-05T17:40:15  *** arik_ has quit IRC
165 2019-12-05T17:55:26  *** r251d has quit IRC
166 2019-12-05T18:08:05  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
167 2019-12-05T18:09:03  *** b10c has quit IRC
168 2019-12-05T18:14:05  *** arik_ has quit IRC
169 2019-12-05T18:36:00  *** pyskell has joined ##taproot-bip-review
170 2019-12-05T18:36:35  *** arik_ has joined ##taproot-bip-review
171 2019-12-05T18:49:38  *** arik_ has quit IRC
172 2019-12-05T20:08:17  *** jonatack has quit IRC
173 2019-12-05T20:23:45  *** dr-orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review
174 2019-12-05T21:30:32  <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
175 2019-12-05T21:44:02  *** pyskell has quit IRC
176 2019-12-05T21:50:32  *** Chris_Stewart_5 has quit IRC
177 2019-12-05T22:16:08  *** belcher has quit IRC
178 2019-12-05T22:31:55  *** jonatack has joined ##taproot-bip-review
179 2019-12-05T23:07:38  *** belcher has joined ##taproot-bip-review
180 2019-12-05T23:09:28  *** davterra has quit IRC
181 2019-12-05T23:10:32  *** davterra has joined ##taproot-bip-review
182 2019-12-05T23:47:55  *** dr-orlovsky has quit IRC
183 2019-12-05T23:48:04  *** orlovsky has joined ##taproot-bip-review