-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 783
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
SSS #405
Comments
BIP84 -Papiersicherung Bitcoin Konten 15.pdf Inspiration: The template i use to secure blue wallets for my friends |
What about social securing through several wallets based on the model of Shamir's Secret? - Papers have lots of downsides. https://iancoleman.io/slip39/ |
@Abstraktikus wow thats awesome! As for SSS, Im not a fan. Like, giving away parts of your secret is just bad opsec: "Look at me, I got something to hide, probably significant amounts of money!". But should be pretty easy to implement, for |
Lol. Excellent response. I partially agree. Sorry. Long answer. Here’s the why: |
I think Shamir secret share is awesome. We can start with simple case - create compatible solution with Trezor using https://github.com/ilap/slip39-js |
Currently digging into SSS. |
I believe the drawback on sss compared to multisig is that sss is not
verifiable, thus trust on the creator/software is necessary?
Am I wrong?
…On Mon, 8 Jun 2020 at 20:49, Overtorment ***@***.***> wrote:
Currently digging into SSS.
Reading through
https://blog.keys.casa/shamirs-secret-sharing-security-shortcomings/
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#405 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJOLHK6WKZQRA7K2U5ISADRVUXFNANCNFSM4G5VVVFQ>
.
|
I'm not sure what you mean by verifiable, that by having one share you can't check the integrity of another? It is true
Correct But I'm not thinking of sss as a complete opposite thing to multisig. The usage is different. I agree that well-designed multisig workflow could be better than sss. My initial plan to add sss to BW was to be able to reconstruct Entropy from sss trezor backup and create regular HD wallet. Unfortunately slip39 is not just about Entropy encoding. They also altered key derivation scheme. This means there is no way to convert bip39 wallet to slip39 :( If we add ability to backup current BIP39 wallets using sss they will be not interoperable with Trezor sss and may lead to a lot of confusion. I'm still thinking it will be a nice feature, I will try to do more research on it. cc @prusnak |
That is a feature by design - if you convert BIP39 to SLIP39 and your coins are stolen - how do you know whether the old backup (BIP39) or the new setup (SLIP39) was compromised? |
who else supports SLIP39 ? if we implement as-is, how much compatibility across the industry we will get? |
Electrum supports recovery apparently
spesmilo/electrum#5692
…On Tue, Jun 9, 2020 at 5:16 PM Overtorment ***@***.***> wrote:
who else supports SLIP39 ? if we implement as-is, how much compatibility
across the industry we will get?
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#405 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAJOLHJPTNJROGSWBFO4DHTRVZG5NANCNFSM4G5VVVFQ>
.
|
This is only to control Trezor with Electrum. Electrum itself doesn't support creating/restoring SLIP39 backups
I can't find any besides Trezor It would be nice to be able to import Trezor SLIP39 wallet, but I can't find any working tools to implement it. Theoretically it is possible to convert BIP39 to 59 words length SLIP39, but again no working tools and I doubt it would be useful in practice. A few links:
Looks like it is too early. Perhaps in future somebody will create standard to backup BIP39 to sss, but it is not here yet. |
I would strongly advocate against that for reason I posted above. |
It does support restoring SLIP39 backups but you need to have Trezor T (the majority of the process happens on the device). |
This is going to change and there will be a pull request adding pure-software (with no device) SLIP39 recovery to Electrum soon. |
Trezor team made a PR to Electrum with slip39 implementation Probably we can port it to JS and use in BW |
slip39 might have already been implemented under bitcoinjs, just look there. slip39 recovery we can definitely do, no questions asked. |
It seems that SLIP39 was implemented in 6.1.0 release, so we can close this? https://github.com/BlueWallet/BlueWallet/releases/tag/v6.1.0 |
No description provided.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: