| 01:16:28 | Luke-Jr: | michagogo|cloud: hm? |
| 01:51:34 | Luke-Jr: | oh |
| 04:33:53 | ioi: | ioi is now known as Guest43428 |
| 11:39:26 | OneFixt_: | OneFixt_ is now known as OneFixt |
| 17:42:52 | nsh: | the gig's up guys: http://bitcoinisablackop.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/thoughts-on-bitcoin/ |
| 17:45:16 | phantomcircuit: | nsh, that is possibly one of the stupidest things i've read today |
| 17:45:24 | phantomcircuit: | wait no |
| 17:45:27 | phantomcircuit: | only second place |
| 17:46:33 | petertodd: | always helpful to have obviously crazy people criticising you you know - lets you lump in all your critics in one basket :P |
| 17:53:18 | michagogo|cloud: | ...how the f*** is it obfuscated? |
| 17:53:36 | petertodd: | michagogo|cloud: moon math |
| 17:53:36 | michagogo|cloud: | And there's no encryption involved... |
| 17:53:53 | michagogo|cloud: | ;;google stuxnet |
| 17:53:54 | gribble: | Stuxnet - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia: ; Stuxnet: Anatomy of a Computer Virus on Vimeo: ; W32 Stuxnet Dossier - Symantec: |
| 17:54:25 | petertodd: | heh, seriously if anything if I find out that Bitcoin was a NSA plot, I'm going to commend the people involved for excellent in the new field of programmer/actors |
| 17:54:29 | michagogo|cloud: | Predating it by about 2 years... |
| 17:54:41 | michagogo|cloud: | Sorry, a year and a half |
| 17:55:03 | michagogo|cloud: | * michagogo|cloud suspects this is simple trolling |
| 17:55:14 | petertodd: | indeed |
| 17:58:12 | nsh: | it's one of those unstoppable Poe's law meets immovable Hanlon's razor situations |
| 18:18:49 | a5m0: | speaking of stealth addresses: "As for the nonce keypair, that is included in the transaction in an additional zero-valued output" wouldn't this be a weakness in that it prevents sending to stealth addresses from webwallets/alternative clients that only allow sending to an address? |
| 18:19:14 | petertodd: | a5m0: yeah they need to be upgraded of course |
| 18:19:30 | petertodd: | a5m0: no easy way around that |
| 18:26:04 | shesek: | is it planned to work with multiple stealth outputs? |
| 18:26:33 | shesek: | with multiple OP_RETURNs, each immediately after the regular outputs, or something like that? |
| 18:27:17 | petertodd: | shesek: well interestingly in the no-prefix case you only need a single OP_RETURN and single ephemeral pubkey |
| 18:28:31 | petertodd: | however if you want to use coinjoin with stealth addrs, then that's a problem... we should allow multiple OP_RETURN's if we're not going to ban OP_CHECK(MULTI)SIG |
| 18:29:54 | shesek: | how does it work with a single OP_RETURN? |
| 18:30:45 | petertodd: | shesek: simple, the ephemeral pubkey is just a pubkey - you can reuse it for multiple ECDH nonces on multiple outputs - the other outputs just look like change or something else to each recipient |
| 18:31:42 | petertodd: | e.g. you could do a wallet where you have a single master key which is used to derive ephemeral keys *deterministically*, and then use stealth addresses for your *change* |
| 18:31:44 | shesek: | right, yeah, that makes sense |
| 18:31:50 | shesek: | not quite sure why I thought this was a problem |
| 18:42:23 | a5m0: | without previous knowlege is it possible to search the blockchain for multisig transactions that require a specific signature to unlock? |
| 18:42:58 | shesek: | specific signature or specific public key? |
| 18:43:20 | shesek: | the signature depends on the exact spending transaction, this doesn't really make sense |
| 18:43:32 | a5m0: | say there is a 2of3 address that someone paid to, could i find this address if i knew 1 or 2 of those 3? |
| 18:43:42 | shesek: | if you meant public key - it is possible for pay-to-script transactions, but not for pay-to-script-hash |
| 18:47:38 | a5m0: | how would you locate those pay-to-script transactions? |
| 18:52:03 | shesek: | well, the output script would contain a list of public keys. you would just check if the public key you're searching for is in there |
| 18:52:41 | shesek: | if you meant how you would technically do that, I don't think there are any tools that'll allow you to do that. you'll have to write something yourself that searches for it |
| 18:55:07 | a5m0: | if coins were sent to the 2of3 payment address but not yet spent or otherwise published, you would not be able to search the output script though right? |
| 18:56:43 | shesek: | if it was sent to a pay-to-script-hash (p2sh) address - no, you wouldn't |
| 18:57:04 | shesek: | if it was sent to a regular pay-to-script, the public keys list would be part of the transaction sending the funds to the multisig |
| 18:57:37 | shesek: | (and it wouldn't be a "multisig address" in this case - those outputs aren't represented as addresses, only p2sh are) |
| 19:02:43 | a5m0: | i'm talking about the keys that are required to redeem the multisig, not the pubkeys that sent to it |
| 19:03:10 | shesek: | I'm talking about the same thing |
| 19:03:42 | shesek: | with p2sh, the transaction output contains the script hash, and the actual script is revealed when you're redeeming from the p2sh |
| 19:04:25 | shesek: | with regular pay-to-script outputs, the script itself is part of the funding transaction, and the list of the 3 public keys (assuming a 2-of-3 multisig) are part of the output paying to the multisig |
| 19:11:06 | a5m0: | hmmm it sounds like i have some testnet work to do |
| 19:12:17 | nsh: | +1 |
| 19:12:44 | nsh: | someone could make a testnet transaction type walkthrough/tutorial/gamething |
| 19:13:09 | a5m0: | thanks shesek |
| 20:44:35 | firepacket: | firepacket is now known as Guest60138 |
| 22:59:31 | midnightmagic: | midnightmagic is now known as midmagic |
| 22:59:39 | midmagic: | midmagic is now known as midnightmagic |