From: Erik Aronesty <erik@q32.com>
To: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: [bitcoin-dev] Schnorr sigs vs pairing sigs
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 14:01:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJowKg+Sgfv-FxZ2gyYWO4HmVwVFZjpjN3RkGN4y1TJwpuLMtQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
Schnorr sigs rely so heavily on the masking provided by a random
nonce. There are so many easy ways to introduce bias (hash + modulo,
for example).
Even 2 bits of bias can result in serious attacks:
https://ecc2017.cs.ru.nl/slides/ecc2017-tibouchi.pdf
Maybe pairing based sigs - which are slower - might be both more
flexible, and better suited to secure implemetnations?
next reply other threads:[~2020-03-05 19:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-05 19:01 Erik Aronesty [this message]
2020-03-06 6:40 ` [bitcoin-dev] Schnorr sigs vs pairing sigs Lloyd Fournier
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAJowKg+Sgfv-FxZ2gyYWO4HmVwVFZjpjN3RkGN4y1TJwpuLMtQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=erik@q32.com \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox