Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

key generation: use standard blinding instead. #3

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

rustyrussell
Copy link
Collaborator

We use the counter as a blinding factor for payments to either side,
and the per-commitment-secret for the revocation keys.

We were also missing a place where we sent the first revocation key,
so fix that (has to be after initial open handshake, once we know their
base point).

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell rusty@rustcorp.com.au

We use the counter as a blinding factor for payments to either side,
and the per-commitment-secret for the revocation keys.

We were also missing a place where we sent the first revocation key,
so fix that (has to be after initial open handshake, once we know their
base point).

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
rustyrussell added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2016
rustyrussell added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 15, 2016
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
@rustyrussell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@adiabat @Roasbeef

@rustyrussell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Turns out this is too simple, as it requires 33 bytes additional storage per tx for a watcher. Closing.

rustyrussell added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 19, 2016
I missed this somehow from the spec.

Reported-by: Olaoluwa Osuntokun <laolu32@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
@rustyrussell rustyrussell deleted the keygen-via-blinding branch May 18, 2017 00:14
rustyrussell referenced this pull request in rustyrussell/lightning-rfc Jul 4, 2017
…heck fee

The recipient should check the fee is valid, otherwise we might get
fun overflow games.  So might as well check that it's better than the
previous offer (as the sender is already required to do).

Changing BOLT #3 to define the mutual close tx is next patch.

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
rustyrussell referenced this pull request in rustyrussell/lightning-rfc Jul 4, 2017
…heck fee

The recipient should check the fee is valid, otherwise we might get
fun overflow games.  So might as well check that it's better than the
previous offer (as the sender is already required to do).

Changing BOLT #3 to define the mutual close tx is next patch.

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
rustyrussell referenced this pull request in rustyrussell/lightning-rfc Jul 11, 2017
…heck fee

The recipient should check the fee is valid, otherwise we might get
fun overflow games.  So might as well check that it's better than the
previous offer (as the sender is already required to do).

Changing BOLT #3 to define the mutual close tx is next patch.

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
fjahr pushed a commit to fjahr/lightning-mw that referenced this pull request Jan 1, 2019
fjahr pushed a commit to fjahr/lightning-mw that referenced this pull request Jan 12, 2019
darosior added a commit to darosior/lightning-rfc that referenced this pull request Sep 2, 2019
darosior added a commit to darosior/lightning-rfc that referenced this pull request Sep 2, 2019
NIT but it rendered poorly when tabs where used (whereas spaces were previously used)
@TheBlueMatt TheBlueMatt mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2019
t-bast referenced this pull request in t-bast/bolts May 4, 2022
Dual funding proposed codec updates
ariard referenced this pull request in ariard/lightning-rfc Oct 4, 2022
Switch to miniscript generated scripts where possible, and include policy notation
ifuensan added a commit to ifuensan/bolts that referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant