Thank you for the question, Boris. That was an easy one:

Short answer is Lamport hashes are protected by long hash of key fingerprint an 
ECC (Schnorr or otherwise conventional) public-key, which is not published 
until first transaction. For clarity:

HL(.) = serial-work- and memory-*hard* hash with *short* digest (ex.: Argon2 
with ~ 12 bytes output. "L" for "Lamport");
HC(.) = nonspecific representation of conventional, serial-work- and 
memory-*easy* hashes with *long* (brute-force-resistant) digest length. "C" for 
"Conventional";
KDF(.) = conventional key deriving function
ECCPUB = public key correspondent to ECCPRI
ECCPRI = KDF(seed, tag) //conventional BTC signing key (could be Schnorr 
instead)
LAMPPUB = HL(LAMPPRIi)
LAMPPRI = HL(seed, tag) //Though it is (more) feasible to crack a seed S that 
works as pre-image to LAMPRI, such seed can only be deemed valid if the public 
key correspondent to KDF(s) = ECCPUB, so ultimately, cracking seed is still as 
hard as cracking a conventional seed.
ADDR = H(ECCPUB, LAMPPUB) //Conventional BTC key fingerprinting with 
conventionally used hashes and their respective brute-force-resistant digest 
lengths
TX = plaintext transaction
LSIG = HL(TX, LAMPPRI)
COMMITMENT = Smart contract stating "This UTXO is frozen until one of the 
following happens: A) publishing of a L such that HL(TX,L) = LSIG before T2 in 
which case TX is deemed valid and executed, or B) T2 blocks from now, when 
miner of LSIG has gets F1+FF1, and the miner of COMMITMENT gets FC, both from 
UTXO"
BL = "Bundle of Lamport scheme" = (TX, LSIG)
BC = "Bundle of Commitment and Conventional Signing" = (COMMITMENT, 
ECCPRI(COMMITMENT), ECCPUB, LAMPPUB)        //LAMPPUB is added here to allow 
easy verification that ECCPUB corresponds to ADDR
BT = "Total Bundle" = (BL, BC)
F1 = fee offered to mine BL
FF1 = fine offered to miner of BL to compensate for delay
FC = fee offered to mine BC in case of default
T0 = Block height of broadcasting of BT
T1 = Block height owner should aim at broadcasting LAMPPRI  block ~ T0+1 to 
T0+6 blocks. This is to protect owner from dissensus (revealing LAMPPRI in a 
block and have it utilized to forge transaction in a competing block of same 
height).
T2 = Block height of expiration of commitment ~ T0+24 hours to T0+ a few days 
to protect user from execution of commitment being triggered by innocent 
unavailability.

>From ADDR alone, Miners, cannot forge a valid LSIG, nor try to ascertain 
>LAMPPUB or LAMPPRI, because of pre-image-resistance of H(.) and brute-force 
>resistance of ECCPUB before being published. The saving happens because, safe 
>from T2 passing without LAMPRI being broadcasted, only BL and LAMPPR, and not 
>BC, end up in Blockchain.

The proposed scheme, therefore allows for only 1 instance of Lamport 
schemed-based economic transaction, which has to be the first transaction of 
ADDR (because of publishing of ECCPUB). After this first transaction, ADDR is 
stil valid, just no longer able to issue transactions.

The proposed scheme, therefore, favors the good practice of non-address reuse.

YSVB

Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

On Tuesday, December 19th, 2023 at 1:45 AM, Nagaev Boris <bnag...@gmail.com> 
wrote:


> On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 7:44 PM yuri...@pm.me wrote:
> 

> > I beg to disagree: key owner broadcasts first bundle (let's call it this 
> > way) so that it is on any miner's best interest to include said bundle on 
> > their's attempted coinbase because they know if they don't any other 
> > competing miner will in the next block.
> 

> 

> What if an attacker broadcasts the first bundle? He spent a lot of
> time cracking the hash which is the part of the address in the
> proposed scheme. Then he cracked the second layer of hashing to have
> both hashes ready. If the utxo has enough sats, the attack is
> economically viable.
> 

> 

> --
> Best regards,
> Boris Nagaev

Attachment: publickey - yurisvb@pm.me - 0x535F445D.asc
Description: application/pgp-keys

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev

Reply via email to