RFC: Milestone Merkle Validation #12
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Wollac
changed the title
luca-moser
reviewed
May 12, 2020
text/0012-milestone-merkle-validation/0012-milestone-merkle-validation.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
luca-moser
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2020
text/0012-milestone-merkle-validation/0012-milestone-merkle-validation.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
text/0012-milestone-merkle-validation/0012-milestone-merkle-validation.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…lidation.md Co-authored-by: Thibault Martinez <thibault.martinez.30@gmail.com>
thibault-martinez
approved these changes
Jun 29, 2020
alexsporn
approved these changes
Jun 30, 2020
| - The Merkle tree hash can be defined recursively:<br> | ||
| MTH(D<sub>n</sub>) = BLAKE2( 0x01 || MTH({d<sub>1</sub>, ..., d<sub>k</sub>}) || MTH({d<sub>k+1</sub>, ..., d<sub>n</sub>}) ). | ||
|
|
||
| Note that the hash calculations for leaves and nodes differ. This allows the validator to distinguish between leaves and nodes, which is required to provide second preimage resistance. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we should add a reference link because I don't think this is common knowledge?
Btw, even without this protection it is not a big deal if I understand correctly?
Even so, we should nonetheless add the protection you described
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I didn't want to add an external link whose content or availability might change in the near future. Instead, I added a few more sentences explaining that particular attack on Merkle trees.
text/0012-milestone-merkle-validation/0012-milestone-merkle-validation.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Wollac
commented
Jul 13, 2020
text/0012-milestone-merkle-validation/0012-milestone-merkle-validation.md
Show resolved
Hide resolved
GalRogozinski
approved these changes
Jul 13, 2020
PhilippGackstatter
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 23, 2023
TIP-47: Storage Deposit
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Rendered
Example Go implementation in wollac/iota-crypto-demo: