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

Deterministic points #862

Closed

Conversation

rustyrussell
Copy link
Collaborator

Built on top of @niftynei 's https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lightning-rfc/pull/851/commits, this alters that protocol to use @LLFourn's deterministic points.

This is useful, because splice wants to change the points, and now it's as easy as updating the generation.

niftynei and others added 2 commits March 3, 2021 15:47
This commit adds the interactive transaction construction protcol, as
well as the first practical example of using it, v2 of channel
establishment.

Note that for v2 we also update the channel_id, which now uses the hash
of the revocation_basepoints. We move away from using the funding
transaction id, as the introduction of RBF* makes it such that a single
channel may have many funding transaction id's over the course of
its lifetime.

*Later, also splicing
Using a scheme derived from Lloyd Fournier's:

https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/lightning-dev/2020-December/002907.html

Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
@rustyrussell rustyrussell marked this pull request as draft April 20, 2021 07:10
@rustyrussell
Copy link
Collaborator Author

After careful consideration, I am withdrawing this. The issue is that it is no longer possible to have separate secret keys for each channel: a compromise of one channel's keys would compromise the others. That isn't a security requirement right now, but it's definitely a valid security model: you can hold all your own channels' keys and contain the damage that can be done. c-lightning early on operated in this manner, for example.

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.

None yet

2 participants