Can you please clarify which terms in that description are elliptic curve points, and which are scalars?
Actually, it looks like in order to compute a multiparty signature you will need to broadcast shares of r first, so it's not offline :(It is still seems, to me, to be a simpler mechanism than musig - with security assumptions that match the original Schnorr construction more closely, and should therefore be easier to prove secure in a multiparty context.Shamir/Schnorr threshold multi-signature scheme:Each party:- Has a public key g*x', where x' is their private key, and where H(g*x) can be considered their public index for the purposes of Shamir polynomial interpolation- Rolls a random k' and compute r' = g*k'- Broadcast r' as a share- Computes g*k, via lagrange interpolation across shares. At this point k is not known to any party unless Shamir is vulnerable or DL is not hard- Computes e' = H(M) * r'- Computes s' = k'-x*e'- Share of signature is (s', e')Verification is the same as Scnhorr, but only after using interpolation to get the needed (s, e, g*x) from shares of s', e' and g*x':- Using lagrange interpolation, compute the public key g*x- Again, using lagrange interpolation, compute (s, e)- Verify the signature as per standard SchnorrSecurity assumptions:- Because this is not additive, and instead we are using Shamir combination, the additional blinding and masking steps of musig are not needed to create a secure scheme.- The scheme is the same as Schnorr otherwise- The only thing to prove is that H(M) * r does not reveal any information about k ... which relies on the same DL assumptions as Bitcoin itself- Overall, this seems, to me at least, to have a smaller attack surface because there's fewer moving partsOn Mon, Jul 9, 2018 at 8:24 AM, Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com> wrote:I was hoping that nobody in this group saw an obvious problem with it then I'd sit down and try to write up a paper.Not that hard to just reuse the work done on schnorr. And demonstrate that there are no additional assumptions._______________________________________________On Mon, Jul 9, 2018, 12:40 AM Pieter Wuille <pieter.wuille@gmail.com> wrote:On Sun, Jul 8, 2018, 21:29 Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com> wrote:Because it's non-interactive, this construction can produce multisig signatures offline. Each device produces a signature using it's own k-share and x-share. It's only necessary to interpolate M of n shares.There are no round trips.The security is Shamir + discrete log.it's just something I've been tinkering with and I can't see an obvious problem.It's basically the same as schnorr, but you use a threshold hash to fix the need to be online.Just seems more useful to me.That sounds very useful if true, but I don't think we should include novel cryptography in Bitcoin based on your not seeing an obvious problem with it.I'm looking forward to seeing a more complete writeup though.Cheers,--Pieter
bitcoin-dev mailing list
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev