Devrandom [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2018-11-28 📝 Original message:Hi Omer, Are there any ...

📅 Original date posted:2018-11-28
📝 Original message:Hi Omer,

Are there any candidates for non-interactive threshold signatures?
Interactive signatures are not very suitable for air-gapped use cases.

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 11:18 AM Omer Shlomovits via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I am working for the past few months with collaborators (in cc) on
> providing Rust reference implementations to existing multi party schemes
> for Schnorr signatures [1]. This includes aggregated signatures,
> accountable signatures (which for n out of n are multi-signatures) and
> threshold signatures (wip).
> The project can be found here:
> https://github.com/KZen-networks/multi-party-schnorr .
> We aim that if the protocol is run in a configuration of a single party it
> will be bip-schnorr [2] compliant.
>
> Hope you'll find it useful :)
> Questions, suggestions and pull requests are welcome!
>
>
> [1]
> https://github.com/KZen-networks/multi-party-schnorr/tree/master/papers
> [2] https://github.com/sipa/bips/blob/bip-schnorr/bip-schnorr.mediawiki
> _______________________________________________
> bitcoin-dev mailing list
> bitcoin-dev at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20181127/9bf84f7f/attachment.html>;