-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 59
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
Confidential Transactions #161
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@UdjinM6 @PastaPastaPasta I believe recent updates to the DIP have addressed all your review comments, so I am requesting another review |
also, it was not mentioned in review but since this DIP changes Consensus rules I changed the DIP Type to Consensus |
* A BP rangeproof that ensures the amount transferred is inside a certain interval between 0 and 2^N - 1 | ||
* To support all potential value transfers between 0 and 21M the BP rangeproof needs N equal to 52 | ||
* The exact size of the proof depends on the number of inputs and outputs | ||
* An explicit fee, since the fee cannot be computed by the network since the amount is hidden |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't see where this explicit fee is in your specified format
dip-ct.md
Outdated
The exact structure of a CT address is as follows. It contains the following data: | ||
|
||
* salt (AKA blinding factor) . 32 byte random value | ||
* pk . The compressed public key, a 33 byte secp256k1 curve point. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Normally, to spend from an address you expose the public key. Here you would need to expose the pk and salt in order to spend? what is the point of the salt?
This is a draft DIP for adding Confidential Transactions (CTs) to Dash. I would like to request a DIP number be assigned.
Any and all feedback is welcome, including suggestions for a base58 prefix for CT addresses.