On Sun, 2020-03-22 at 11:30 -0400, Russell O'Connor wrote: > Your claim is that if we don't fix the pubkey issue there is no point > in fixing the signature issue. I disagree. While I think both > issues need to be fully addressed, the issues around the original > proposed non-deterministic signature scheme are far more severe. The > proposal would move us from a deterministic scheme, where spot checks > are possible, with all the caveats that entails, to a non- > deterministic scheme where spot checks are impossible. My hope is > that we can standardise a scheme that has the advantages of non- > determinism without the threat of covert channels.
I think we agree that both issues should be addressed, and this is all what matters in the end. Now that we have a proposal for Schnorr signatures, it's indeed a good time to work on these issues. Tim _______________________________________________ bitcoin-dev mailing list bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev