gavinandresen at gmail.com
Mon Feb 20 17:17:07 UTC 2012
> base58-encode: [one-byte network ID][20-byte hash][one-byte address
How will the code distinguish between the old scheme:
and the new?
1 in 256 old addresses will have a first-byte-of-checksum that matches the
new address class; I guess the code would do something like:
a) If the 4-byte checksum matches, then assume it is a singlesig address (1
in 2^32 multisig addresses will incorrectly match)
b) If the one-byte-address-class and 3-byte checksum match, then it is a
c) Otherwise, invalid address
The 1 in 2^32 multisig addresses also being valid singlesig addresses makes
me think this scheme won't work-- an attacker willing to generate 8 billion
or so ECDSA keys could generate a single/multisig collision. I'm not sure
how that could be leveraged to their advantage, but I bet they'd find a way.
RE: should it be a BIP: The BIP process is described in BIP
and you're following it perfectly so far:
1) Post a rough draft of the idea here to see if there's any chance it'll
2) Assuming a positive response and no major flaws: write up a draft BIP
3) Post the draft BIP here, where it can be picked apart.
4) Assuming no major flaws, ask the BIP editor (Amir) for a BIP number
I'd also encourage you to actually implement your idea between steps 3 and
4. But in this particular case, I think an attacker being able to create
singlesig/p2sh address collisions counts as a major flaw.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the bitcoin-dev