Updated newly generated xml files

static/bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/combined_ColliderScript-Covenants-in-Bitcoin-via-160-bit-hash-collisions.xml

@@ -2,7 +2,10 @@
 <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
   <id>2</id>
   <title>Combined summary - ColliderScript: Covenants in Bitcoin via 160-bit hash collisions</title>
-  <updated>2024-11-26T02:30:20.674610+00:00</updated>
+  <updated>2024-11-28T02:33:39.286931+00:00</updated>
+  <author>
+    <name>Ethan Heilman 2024-11-27 22:37:00+00:00</name>
+  </author>
   <author>
     <name>Antoine Riard 2024-11-25 03:42:00+00:00</name>
   </author>
@@ -15,6 +18,7 @@
   <author>
     <name>Ethan Heilman 2024-11-07 17:44:00+00:00</name>
   </author>
+  <link href="bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/ma6bea9a7a49e563fd36ff17be9adfab7456d314b_ColliderScript-Covenants-in-Bitcoin-via-160-bit-hash-collisions.xml" rel="alternate"/>
   <link href="bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/m97a735e2fb573d1becffc5c7920fc7c6bf80288f_ColliderScript-Covenants-in-Bitcoin-via-160-bit-hash-collisions.xml" rel="alternate"/>
   <link href="bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/m4278899c5d3fed1b1537d899f7445bed0389bcf6_ColliderScript-Covenants-in-Bitcoin-via-160-bit-hash-collisions.xml" rel="alternate"/>
   <link href="bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/m933ae211b37744e7426a9fba0e412d16e0c47640_ColliderScript-Covenants-in-Bitcoin-via-160-bit-hash-collisions.xml" rel="alternate"/>
@@ -23,13 +27,17 @@
   <entry>
     <id>2</id>
     <title>Combined summary - ColliderScript: Covenants in Bitcoin via 160-bit hash collisions</title>
-    <updated>2024-11-26T02:30:20.674668+00:00</updated>
-    <link href="https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/CAEM=y+W2jyFoJAq9XrE9whQ7EZG4HRST01TucWHJtBhQiRTSNQ@mail.gmail.com/T/#m97a735e2fb573d1becffc5c7920fc7c6bf80288f" rel="alternate"/>
-    <summary>The conversation between Antoine and Ethan focuses on a sophisticated technique related to the development of Bitcoin transactions, specifically addressing the concept of transaction grinding to ensure specific data outcomes. The technique centers around finding a variable 'y' that confirms the equivalence of s1 and s2 within transactions, which is critical for the integrity of covenant spending in Bitcoin's multi-party systems. This process, known as grinding, ensures that y1 and y2 (derived from s1 and s2 respectively) are identical, thereby maintaining transaction consistency across different script sizes. The deterministic nature of this method, involving functions like dGen_big_script and dGen_small_script, guarantees consistent outputs, which is pivotal for the security and effectiveness of the transaction modification process. Moreover, the discussion sheds light on the importance of randomness in protecting against potential attacks, emphasizing that staticness does not inherently benefit attackers but rather increases the challenge of finding collisions due to the need for adequate randomization.
+    <updated>2024-11-28T02:33:39.287011+00:00</updated>
+    <link href="https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/CAEM=y+W2jyFoJAq9XrE9whQ7EZG4HRST01TucWHJtBhQiRTSNQ@mail.gmail.com/T/#ma6bea9a7a49e563fd36ff17be9adfab7456d314b" rel="alternate"/>
+    <summary>The recent discussions within the Bitcoin Development Mailing List have shed light on several advanced cryptographic methods aimed at enhancing the security and functionality of Bitcoin transactions. A key focus has been on the method for proving the equivalence of y1 and y2 values in transaction scripts, a technique that underscores the importance of cryptographic soundness without relying on assumptions. This method relies on the consistency of witness stack elements (w,t) across both small and large script interpretations, highlighting a deterministic approach to transaction verification that is central to maintaining the blockchain's integrity.
+
+Further scrutiny reveals the application of this method in the context of multi-party colliderscript-based vault protocols, emphasizing the need for all participants to verify transaction equivalence prior to engagement. This pre-verification process serves as a critical safeguard against potential security breaches. The discussion also delves into the operational specifics, questioning the necessity of duplicating certain variables in the scripting process and scrutinizing the role and definition of parameters within Bitcoin equivalence tester sets.
+
+Another aspect of the conversation addresses the concept of transaction grinding and its implications for transaction security. Through a detailed explanation, it becomes evident that grinding plays a crucial role in ensuring the equality of s1 and s2 values within a transaction, thereby guaranteeing that the outputs from both large and small scripts remain identical despite different encodings. This deterministic property of the dGen functions is highlighted as pivotal for achieving the desired modifications through grinding, with an emphasis on the significance of randomness in thwarting potential attacks by ensuring transaction security.
 
-The paper discussed introduces an innovative cryptographic verification method using an equivalence check between algorithms. It employs traditional signature validation processes alongside Schnorr signatures to manipulate data-carrying transactions until achieving a desired alignment with the SchnorrHash. This approach also includes "signature defragmentation" using 32-bit integers opcodes and attempts to reimplement complex cryptographic operations within the Bitcoin script framework. This methodology aims at executing basic cryptographic operations under the scripting constraints of Bitcoin, especially for scenarios like p2tr tapscript spends. The essence of this equivalence check lies in deriving a variable 'y' from both a complex and a simplified script, ensuring logical equivalence without direct comparison, thus facilitating further signature and covenant checks within a block's 4MB weight limit. The paper raises concerns about potential vulnerabilities, such as the risk of easier collision findings by adversaries and transaction data forgery, suggesting the need for protocol enhancements to mitigate these threats.
+In addition to these technical discussions, the mailing list also introduces a novel approach towards cryptographic verification in Bitcoin transactions, employing an equivalence check mechanism between two algorithm sets. This innovative method utilizes traditional signature validation processes alongside a "signature defragmentation" technique, aiming to maintain the integrity of signature compositions. The methodology seeks to balance complexity and practicality within the scripting limitations of Bitcoin, sparking further dialogue on security models and potential improvements to enhance protocol robustness.
 
-Furthermore, the publication details a novel method for creating and spending covenants in Bitcoin using Tapscript, without requiring soft forks. This approach represents a significant computational effort, likened to ~2^86 hash calls, markedly higher than the effort required for mining a Bitcoin block. Despite its computational intensity, this method illuminates the potential for arbitrary computation within Bitcoin transactions, limited only by the circuit size fitting within a 4MB transaction. An intriguing application of this technique is its use for Lamport signatures, potentially enabling Bitcoin transactions to resist quantum computing threats. This demonstrates the method's broader applicability beyond covenants, offering insights into how Bitcoin's scripting capabilities can be expanded. The paper underscores the trade-offs between computational cost and transaction size, presenting a foundational method for enforcing covenants on the blockchain. For those interested in the technical details and implications for Bitcoin's development, the full paper is accessible at [colliderscript.co/colliderscript.pdf](https://colliderscript.co/colliderscript.pdf), offering a comprehensive exploration of the subject matter.</summary>
-    <published>2024-11-25T03:42:00+00:00</published>
+Lastly, the discourse covers a groundbreaking technique for creating and spending covenants in Bitcoin using Tapscript, without the need for soft forks. Despite the high computational demand associated with covenant spending, this method presents a significant advancement in enabling arbitrary computation within Bitcoin transaction data constraints. An intriguing application of Tapscript for Lamport signatures is discussed, showcasing the potential of this technique to prepare Bitcoin transactions for quantum-resistant security measures. This recent publication represents a substantial contribution to the field, exploring the limits of Bitcoin's scripting capabilities and offering a glimpse into future developments in blockchain technology. For those interested in a deeper dive into the methodologies and their implications for Bitcoin, the full paper is available at [colliderscript.co/colliderscript.pdf](https://colliderscript.co/colliderscript.pdf).</summary>
+    <published>2024-11-27T22:37:00+00:00</published>
   </entry>
 </feed>

static/bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/ma6bea9a7a49e563fd36ff17be9adfab7456d314b_ColliderScript-Covenants-in-Bitcoin-via-160-bit-hash-collisions.xml

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
+<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
+  <id>1</id>
+  <title>ColliderScript: Covenants in Bitcoin via 160-bit hash collisions</title>
+  <updated>2024-11-28T02:33:24.110660+00:00</updated>
+  <author>
+    <name>Ethan Heilman 2024-11-27 22:37:00+00:00</name>
+  </author>
+  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="0.9.0">python-feedgen</generator>
+  <entry>
+    <id>1</id>
+    <title>ColliderScript: Covenants in Bitcoin via 160-bit hash collisions</title>
+    <updated>2024-11-28T02:33:24.110694+00:00</updated>
+    <link href="https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/CAEM=y+W2jyFoJAq9XrE9whQ7EZG4HRST01TucWHJtBhQiRTSNQ@mail.gmail.com/T/#ma6bea9a7a49e563fd36ff17be9adfab7456d314b" rel="alternate"/>
+    <summary>The discussion centers on the cryptographic principle of proving the equivalence of two variables, y1 and y2, in a scripting context without making any assumptions outside of cryptographic soundness. Specifically, it illustrates the use of the OP_DUP operation to demonstrate that both Small Script and Big Script perceive the same (w,t) values with absolute certainty. Here, "w" is identified as a 33-bit stack element, exemplified by the number 23412, whereas "t" refers to a bit vector composed of multiple stack elements, illustrated by a bit string sequence. These elements are introduced as witness stack components by the spending transaction, with Figure 1 highlighting elements pushed onto the stack from the spending transaction in purple.
+
+Furthermore, the conversation shifts to exploring transactional integrity through an example involving two transactions, Txn1 and Txn2, which differ only in their locking scripts. Despite this singular variation—Txn1 uses a specific PUSH command followed by DROP, as does Txn2 albeit with a different value—the hashes of these transactions will be unique, yet they remain semantically equivalent. This aspect raises questions about the goal of a hypothetical attack scenario where one party, Alice, locks coins under a covenant executing a certain action (X), and another party, Eve, aims to accomplish a different objective (Y). Such a scenario underscores the complexity and nuances involved in Bitcoin development and cryptographic security discussions, emphasizing the importance of understanding script operations and transaction semantics within the ecosystem.</summary>
+    <published>2024-11-27T22:37:00+00:00</published>
+  </entry>
+</feed>

static/bitcoin-dev/Nov_2024/mdf4d5c5017c77c10dd14fa387208cbdf0b59dace_Un-FE-d-Covenants-Char-ting-a-new-path-to-Emulated-Covenants-via-BitVM-Integrity-Checks.xml

@@ -0,0 +1,20 @@
+<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
+<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
+  <id>0</id>
+  <title>Un-FE’d Covenants: Char-ting a new path to Emulated Covenants via BitVM Integrity Checks</title>
+  <updated>2024-11-28T02:33:48.164414+00:00</updated>
+  <author>
+    <name>jeremy 2024-11-27 03:05:00+00:00</name>
+  </author>
+  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="0.9.0">python-feedgen</generator>
+  <entry>
+    <id>0</id>
+    <title>Un-FE’d Covenants: Char-ting a new path to Emulated Covenants via BitVM Integrity Checks</title>
+    <updated>2024-11-28T02:33:48.164448+00:00</updated>
+    <link href="https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/[email protected]/T/#u#mdf4d5c5017c77c10dd14fa387208cbdf0b59dace" rel="alternate"/>
+    <summary>The email presents an innovative approach towards implementing Bitcoin covenants, proposing a method that does not necessitate changes to the native protocol. This method involves the use of covenant emulators and signing servers, which marks a departure from previous strategies for covenant emulation. The key feature of this approach is the requirement for oracle signers to deposit bonds with BitVM auditors. These deposits are at risk under a BITVM style fraud proof system; should an oracle signer authorize a transaction that breaches the covenant rules, their funds are susceptible to confiscation. This mechanism aims to ensure adherence to the covenant conditions by imposing a financial penalty for violations.
+
+For those interested in exploring this concept further, the detailed explanation and framework of this approach are accessible through a paper available online. The document provides comprehensive insights into how Bitcoin covenants can be enforced without direct modifications to the protocol, thereby offering a novel solution to the community. The full paper can be accessed at [https://rubin.io/bitcoin/2024/11/26/unfed-covenants/](https://rubin.io/bitcoin/2024/11/26/unfed-covenants/), offering an in-depth view of the proposed system and its operational mechanics.</summary>
+    <published>2024-11-27T03:05:00+00:00</published>
+  </entry>
+</feed>