summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/bip-0322.mediawiki
blob: 606e2f7b4d29101a0689aef3584d8c8fde4c61d1 (plain)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
<pre>
  BIP: 322
  Layer: Applications
  Title: Generic Signed Message Format
  Author: Karl-Johan Alm <karljohan-alm@garage.co.jp>
  Comments-Summary: No comments yet.
  Comments-URI: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/wiki/Comments:BIP-0322
  Status: Draft
  Type: Standards Track
  Created: 2018-09-10
  License: CC0-1.0
</pre>

== Abstract ==

A standard for interoperable generic signed messages based on the Bitcoin Script format.

== Motivation ==

The current message signing standard only works for P2PKH (1...) addresses. By extending it to use a Bitcoin Script based approach, it could be made more generic without causing a too big burden on implementers, who most likely have access to Bitcoin Script interpreters already.

== Specification ==

A new structure <code>SignatureProof</code> is added, which is a simple serializable scriptSig & witness container.

=== Common Header ===

A common header used for signature proofs and challenges is defined as follows:

{|class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"
|-
!Type
!Length
!Name
!Comment
|-
|Uint32||4||flags||standard flags (1-to-1 with standard flags in Bitcoin Core)
|-
|VarInt||1-8||msglen||Number of bytes in message string, excluding NUL termination
|-
|Char*||[msglen]||msg||The message being signed for all subjects, excluding NUL termination
|-
|Uint8||1||entries||Number of proof entries<ref><strong>Why support multiple proofs?</strong> In particular with proof of funds, it is non-trivial to check a large number of individual proofs (one per UTXO) for duplicates. Software could be written to do so, but it seems more efficient to build this check into the specification itself.</ref>
|}

=== SignatureProof container ===

The signature proof begins with a common header, and is followed by [entries] number of signature entries:

{|class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"
|-
!Type
!Length
!Name
!Comment
|-
|VarInt||1-8||scriptsiglen||Number of bytes in scriptSig data
|-
|Uint8*||[scriptsiglen]||scriptsig||ScriptSig data
|-
|VarInt||1-8||witlen||Number of bytes in witness data
|-
|Uint8*||[witlen]||wit||Witness
|}

In some cases, the scriptsig or wit may be empty. If both are empty, the proof is incomplete.

=== Result Codes ===

A verification call will return a result code according to the table below.

{|class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"
|-
!Code
!Description
|-
|INCOMPLETE||One or several of the given challenges had an empty proof. The prover may need some other entity to complete the proof.
|-
|INCONCLUSIVE||One or several of the given proofs used unknown opcodes or the scriptPubKey had an unknown witness version, perhaps due to the verifying node being outdated.
|-
|VALID||All proofs were deemed valid.
|-
|INVALID||One or more of the given proofs were invalid
|-
|ERROR||An error was encountered
|}

=== SignMessage serialization ===

The SignMessage challenge begins with the common header, and is followed by [entries] entries:

{|class="wikitable" style="text-align: center;"
|-
!Type
!Length
!Name
!Comment
|-
|VarInt||1-8||spklen||ScriptPubKey length
|-
|Uint8*||[spklen]||spk||ScriptPubKey
|}

=== Proving and Verifying ===

Let there be an empty set <code>inputs</code> which is populated and tested at each call to one of the actions below.

=== Common steps ===

A sighash is generated based on a scriptPubKey and a message. A VALID verification result code is emitted unless otherwise stated.

# Emits INVALID if scriptPubKey already exists in <code>inputs</code>set, otherwise insert it<ref><strong>Why track duplicates?</strong> Because a 3-entry proof is not proving 3 inputs unless they are all distinct</ref>
# Emits INVALID if the message is not a UTF-8 string encoded using Normalization Form Compatibility Decomposition (NFKD); note specifically that binary messages are not supported
# Define the message pre-image as the sequence "Bitcoin Message:" concatenated with the message, ''excluding'' the null terminating character (if any)
# Let sighash = sha256(sha256(scriptPubKey || pre-image))

=== Proving ===

Returns a signature or fails (emits INVALID).

# Derive the private key privkey for the scriptPubKey; FAIL if not VALID
# Generate a signature sig with privkey=privkey, sighash=sighash
# Return a SignatureProof container with the given signature

=== Verifying ===

Emits one of INCONCLUSIVE, VALID, or INVALID.

# If one or more of the standard flags are unknown, return INCONCLUSIVE
# Verify Script with flags=standard flags, scriptSig=script sig, scriptPubKey=scriptPubKey, witness=witness, and sighash=sighash
# Emit VALID if verify succeeds, otherwise emit INVALID

=== Multiple Proofs ===

When more than one proof is created or verified, repeat the operation for each proof, retaining the inputs set. As noted, if the same input appears more than once, the operation must fail accordingly.

Note that the order of the entries in the proof must match the order of the entries given by the verifier.

* If any of the proofs are empty during a verification process, skip the verification and set the INCOMPLETE flag
* If a verification call returns ERROR or INVALID, return ERROR or INVALID immediately, ignoring as yet unverified entries
* After all verifications complete,
** return INCONCLUSIVE if any verification call returned INCONCLUSIVE
** return SPENT if any verification call returned SPENT
** return INCOMPLETE if the INCOMPLETE flag is set
** return VALID

== Compatibility ==

This specification is not backwards compatible with the legacy signmessage/verifymessage specification. However, legacy addresses (1...) may be used in this implementation without any problems.

== Rationale ==

<references/>

== Reference implementation ==

To do.

== Acknowledgements ==

TODO

== References ==

# Original mailing list thread: https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/2018-March/015818.html
# Pull request, with comments: https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/pull/725

== Copyright ==

This document is licensed under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal license.