📅 Original date posted:2015-10-05
📝 Original message:Hi,
Sorry the late response. Going back to the original message:
> > On 03/10/15 13:42, Jean-Pierre Rupp via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> >> I have been reviewing BIP-45 today. There is a privacy problem with it
> >> that should at least be mentioned in the document.
> >>
> >> When using the same extended public key for all multisig activity, and
> >> dealing with different cosigners in separate multisig accounts, reuse of
> >> the same set of public keys means that all cosigners from all accounts
> >> will be able to monitor multisig activity from every other cosigner, in
> >> every other account.
>
I am not completely sure what you mean by 'account' and 'mutisig activity'.
You seem to imply
that the same set of extended public keys will be used in more that one
wallet, which it is
not required (and certainly not recommended) by BIP45.
According to BIP45, a singing party, in order to generate a wallet address,
needs the extended public keys of all the other parties, so each party will
be able to see the transaction history of the wallet they are sharing, but
if the party has other wallets with other copayers the xpub should be
completely different.
matías
--
BitPay.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151005/d1abcff0/attachment-0001.html>;
Matias Alejo Garcia [ARCHIVE] /
npub1p6…8etde
2023-06-07 19:42:22
in reply to nevent1q…3uen
Author Public Key
npub1p6uknnmm7wknvg9cq5wqsf7ulpsrdzd6zt6qw707y5t05fuzvfdsx8etdePublished at
2023-06-07 19:42:22Event JSON
{
"id": "7d224a31a6235cfb81ea25c58808a3ee418ba9d05983a18c2bbf09239884bb5c",
"pubkey": "0eb969cf7bf3ad3620b8051c0827dcf8603689ba12f40779fe2516fa2782625b",
"created_at": 1686159742,
"kind": 1,
"tags": [
[
"e",
"3e46f2c62587acdbda9b227056f9de6eaf13013e7c73db7dc59fc81adea6f4b6",
"",
"root"
],
[
"e",
"b8002f8d211eb1471dc51994fed09429c555ce41794f124abd2d64eba944d1d6",
"",
"reply"
],
[
"p",
"cd7a2cba8fb58a6131210185f2257692f56b666fb24bf9cf016ca8aaa4a4ae01"
]
],
"content": "📅 Original date posted:2015-10-05\n📝 Original message:Hi,\n\nSorry the late response. Going back to the original message:\n\n\n\u003e \u003e On 03/10/15 13:42, Jean-Pierre Rupp via bitcoin-dev wrote:\n\u003e \u003e\u003e I have been reviewing BIP-45 today. There is a privacy problem with it\n\u003e \u003e\u003e that should at least be mentioned in the document.\n\u003e \u003e\u003e\n\u003e \u003e\u003e When using the same extended public key for all multisig activity, and\n\u003e \u003e\u003e dealing with different cosigners in separate multisig accounts, reuse of\n\u003e \u003e\u003e the same set of public keys means that all cosigners from all accounts\n\u003e \u003e\u003e will be able to monitor multisig activity from every other cosigner, in\n\u003e \u003e\u003e every other account.\n\u003e\n\nI am not completely sure what you mean by 'account' and 'mutisig activity'.\nYou seem to imply\nthat the same set of extended public keys will be used in more that one\nwallet, which it is\nnot required (and certainly not recommended) by BIP45.\n\nAccording to BIP45, a singing party, in order to generate a wallet address,\nneeds the extended public keys of all the other parties, so each party will\nbe able to see the transaction history of the wallet they are sharing, but\nif the party has other wallets with other copayers the xpub should be\ncompletely different.\n\nmatías\n\n\n\n-- \nBitPay.com\n-------------- next part --------------\nAn HTML attachment was scrubbed...\nURL: \u003chttp://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20151005/d1abcff0/attachment-0001.html\u003e",
"sig": "d19bfb88b9d74ac51a38fa7864603b288bccafafe21f70578e834b9d0a516f831b7df62643f5346e03fd0f8ed7b781ab197d03a7b0efadd51271e6f06df44cad"
}