Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
BIP-322 update to remove ProveFunds purpose (with a note about extens…
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
…ibility) and to fix the serialization format
  • Loading branch information
kallewoof committed Jul 29, 2019
1 parent bf057da commit daa5990
Showing 1 changed file with 41 additions and 30 deletions.
71 changes: 41 additions & 30 deletions bip-0322.mediawiki
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ The current message signing standard only works for P2PKH (1...) addresses. By e

A new structure <code>SignatureProof</code> is added, which is a simple serializable scriptSig & witness container.

Two actions "Sign" and "Verify" are defined along with two *purposes* "SignMessage" and "ProveFunds".
Two actions "Sign" and "Verify" are defined along with one ''purpose'', "SignMessage", with the ability to expand in the future to add a potential "ProveFunds" purpose.

=== SignatureProof container ===

Expand All @@ -36,11 +36,7 @@ Two actions "Sign" and "Verify" are defined along with two *purposes* "SignMessa
|-
|Uint32||4||flags||standard flags (1-to-1 with standard flags in Bitcoin Core)
|-
|VarInt||1-8||msglen||Number of bytes in message string, excluding NUL termination
|-
|Char*||[msglen]||msg||The message being signed for all subjects, excluding NUL termination
|-
|Uint8||1||entries||Number of proof entries<ref><strong>Why support multiple proofs?</strong> In particular with proof of funds, it is non-trivial to check a large number of individual proofs (one per UTXO) for duplicates. Software could be written to do so, but it seems more efficient to build this check into the specification itself.</ref>
|Uint8||1||entries||number of proof entries<ref><strong>Why support multiple proofs?</strong> It is non-trivial to check a large number of individual proofs for duplicates. Software could be written to do so, but it seems more efficient to build this check into the specification itself.</ref>
|}

The above is followed by [entries] number of signature entries:
Expand All @@ -56,9 +52,9 @@ The above is followed by [entries] number of signature entries:
|-
|Uint8*||[scriptsiglen]||scriptsig||ScriptSig data
|-
|VarInt||1-8||witlen||Number of bytes in witness data
|VarInt||1-8||witlen||Number of entries in witness stack
|-
|Uint8*||[witlen]||wit||Witness
|Uint8[]*||[witlen]||wit||Witness stack, as [witlen] uint8* vectors, each one prepended with a varint of its size
|}

In some cases, the scriptsig or wit may be empty. If both are empty, the proof is incomplete.
Expand All @@ -80,36 +76,24 @@ A verification call will return a result code according to the table below.
|-
|INVALID||One or more of the given proofs were invalid
|-
|SPENT||One or more of the claimed UTXO:s has been spent
|-
|ERROR||An error was encountered
|}

== Signing and Verifying ==

Let there be an empty set `inputs` which is populated and tested at each call to one of the actions below.
If the challenge consists of a single address and the address is in the P2PK(H) (legacy) format, sign using the legacy format (further information below). Otherwise continue as stated below.

Let there be an empty set <code>inputs</code> which is populated and tested at each call to one of the actions below.

=== Purpose: SignMessage ===

The "SignMessage" purpose generates a sighash based on a scriptPubKey and a message. It emits a VALID verification result code unless otherwise stated.

# Return INVALID if scriptPubKey already exists in `inputs` set, otherwise insert it<ref><strong>Why track duplicates?</strong> Because a 3-entry proof is not proving 3 inputs unless they are all distinct</ref>
# Return INVALID if scriptPubKey already exists in <code>inputs</code> set, otherwise insert it<ref><strong>Why track duplicates?</strong> Because a 3-entry proof is not proving 3 entries unless they are all distinct</ref>
# Define the message pre-image as the sequence "Bitcoin Message:" concatenated with the message, encoded in UTF-8 using Normalization Form Compatibility Decomposition (NFKD)
# Let sighash = sha256(sha256(scriptPubKey || pre-image))
=== Purpose: ProveFunds ===

The "ProveFunds" purpose generates a sighash and a scriptPubKey from a transaction, an output index, and a message. For multiple simultaneous proofs, it also requires access to the ordered list of proofs. It emits a VALID verification result code unless otherwise stated.

# Let txid be the transaction ID of the transaction, and vout be the output index corresponding to the index of the output being spent
# Return INVALID if the txid:vout pair already exists in `inputs` set, otherwise insert it
# Return SPENT if the txid/vout is not a valid UTXO according to a Bitcoin node<ref><strong>Synced up or not?</strong> A normal verifier would use a synced up node. An auditor checking records from a client that were submitted in the past want to use a node that is synced up to the block corresponding to the proof, or the proof will fail, even if it may have been valid at the time of creation.</ref>
# Extract scriptPubKey from transaction output
# Define the message pre-image as the concatenation of the following components:<ref><strong>Why not just the UTXO data?</strong> We want the verifier to be able to challenge the prover with a custom message to sign, or anyone can reuse the POF proof for a set of UTXO:s once they have seen it, and the funds have not yet been spent</ref>
#* the string "POF:"
#* the message, encoded in UTF-8 using Normalization Form Compatibility Decomposition (NFKD), including the null terminating character (i.e. write strlen(message) + 1 bytes, for a C string)
#* all transactions being proven for, as binary txid (little endian uint256) followed by index (little endian uint32), each separated by a single `0x00` byte
# Let sighash = sha256(sha256(scriptPubKey || pre-image))
A private key may be used directly to sign a message. In this case, its P2WPKH bech32 address shall be derived, and used as the input.

=== Action: Sign ===

Expand All @@ -119,6 +103,8 @@ The "Sign" action takes as input a purpose. It returns a signature or fails.
# Derive the private key privkey for the scriptPubKey; FAIL if not VALID
# Generate and return a signature sig with privkey=privkey, sighash=sighash
The resulting signature proof should be encoded using base64 encoding.

=== Action: Verify ===

The "Verify" action takes as input a standard flags value, a script sig, an optional witness, and a purpose.
Expand All @@ -139,30 +125,55 @@ Note that the order of the entries in the proof must match the order of the entr
* If a verification call returns ERROR or INVALID, return ERROR or INVALID immediately, ignoring as yet unverified entries
* After all verifications complete,
** return INCONCLUSIVE if any verification call returned INCONCLUSIVE
** return SPENT if any verification call returned SPENT
** return INCOMPLETE if the INCOMPLETE flag is set
** return VALID
== Legacy format ==

The legacy format is restricted to the legacy P2PK(H) address format, and restricted to one single challenge (address).

Any other input (e.g. multiple addresses, or non-P2PK(H) address format(s)) must be signed using the new format described above.

=== Signing ===

Given the P2PK(H) address <code>a</code> and the message <code>m</code>:
# let <code>p</code> be the pubkey-hash contained in <code>a</code>
# let <code>x</code> be the private key associated with <code>p</code>
# let <code>digest</code> be <code>SHA56d("Bitcoin Signed Message:\n"||m)</code>
# create a compact signature <code>sig</code> (aka "recoverable ECDSA signature") using <code>x</code> on <code>digest</code>
The resulting proof is <code>sig</code>, serialized using the base64 encoding.

=== Verifying ===

Given the P2PK(H) address <code>a</code>, the message <code>m</code>, and the compact signature <code>sig</code>:

# let <code>p</code> be the pubkey-hash contained in <code>a</code>
# let <code>digest</code> be <code>SHA56d("Bitcoin Signed Message:\n"||m)</code>
# attempt pubkey recovery for <code>digest</code> using the signature <code>sig</code> and store the resulting pubkey into <code>Q</code>
## fail verification if pubkey recovery above fails
# let <code>q</code> be the pubkey-hash of <code>Q</code>
# if <code>p == q</code>, the proof is valid, otherwise it is invalid
== Compatibility ==

This specification is not backwards compatible with the legacy signmessage/verifymessage specification. However, legacy addresses (1...) may be used in this implementation without any problems.
This specification is backwards compatible with the legacy signmessage/verifymessage specification through the special case as described above.

== Rationale ==

<references/>

== Reference implementation ==

To do.
# Pull request to Bitcoin Core: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/16440
== Acknowledgements ==

TODO
Thanks to David Harding, Jim Posen, Kalle Rosenbaum, Pieter Wuille, and many others for their feedback on the specification.

== References ==

# Original mailing list thread: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-March/015818.html
# Pull request, with comments: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/725
== Copyright ==

Expand Down

0 comments on commit daa5990

Please sign in to comment.