From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-4.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1YBSAc-0002pp-DM for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 17:55:54 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of niftybox.net designates 95.142.167.147 as permitted sender) client-ip=95.142.167.147; envelope-from=c1.sf-bitcoin@niftybox.net; helo=i3.hyper.to; Received: from i3.hyper.to ([95.142.167.147]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.76) id 1YBSAa-0005w2-Vi for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 17:55:54 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by i3.hyper.to (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13BE7E00AC; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:39:25 +0100 (CET) Received: from i3.hyper.to ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (i3.hyper.to [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id RlcsmTR_zRum; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:39:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by i3.hyper.to (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD1AEE00B0; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:39:24 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at i3.hyper.to Received: from i3.hyper.to ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (i3.hyper.to [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id WCdh9dImYfFd; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:39:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from mimiz (142-254-47-143.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [142.254.47.143]) by i3.hyper.to (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CF1E5E00AC; Wed, 14 Jan 2015 18:39:23 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <1421257150.8969.4.camel@niftybox.net> From: devrandom To: Ruben de Vries Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 09:39:10 -0800 In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.7-0ubuntu1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record X-Headers-End: 1YBSAa-0005w2-Vi Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] convention/standard for sorting public keys for p2sh multisig transactions X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 17:55:54 -0000 At CryptoCorp we recommend to our customers that they sort lexicographically by the public key bytes of the leaf public keys. i.e. the same as BitPay. On Wed, 2015-01-14 at 17:37 +0100, Ruben de Vries wrote: > For p2sh multisig TXs the order of the public keys affect the hash and > there doesn't seem to be an agreed upon way of sorting the public > keys. >=20 >=20 > If there would be a standard (recommended) way of sorting the public > keys that would make it easier for services that implement some form > of multisig to be compatible with each other without much hassle and > making it possible to import keys from one service to another. >=20 >=20 > I'm not suggesting forcing the order, just setting a standard to > recommend, there doesn't seem to be much reason for (new) services to > not follow that recommendation. >=20 >=20 > Ryan from BitPay broad this up before > (https://sourceforge.net/p/bitcoin/mailman/message/32092958/) and in > bitcore they've implemented lexicographical sorting on the hex of the > public key. > In a short search I can't find any other library that has a sorting > function, let alone using it by default, so bitcore is currently my > only reference. >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 > =E2=80=8BRuben de Vries > =E2=80=8BCTO, BlockTrail > -----------------------------------------------------------------------= ------- > New Year. New Location. New Benefits. New Data Center in Ashburn, VA. > GigeNET is offering a free month of service with a new server in Ashbur= n. > Choose from 2 high performing configs, both with 100TB of bandwidth. > Higher redundancy.Lower latency.Increased capacity.Completely compliant= . > http://p.sf.net/sfu/gigenet > _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mai= ling list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourcef= orge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development --=20 Miron / devrandom