Author: AdamISZ 2022-05-23 22:09:52
Published on: 2022-05-23T22:09:52+00:00
In a bitcoin-dev mailing list, AdamISZ (waxwing) requested clarifications about a particular point in the draft BIP. He shared a link to his attempt to summarize Footnote 2, which he found interesting and relevant to the discussion. Jonas Nick responded by restating the paragraph that covers the topic, which discusses how the MuSig2 BIP draft handles identical public keys. The solution requires added complexity due to the MuSig2* optimization, but it allows for identifying and removing disruptive signers, ultimately reducing the complexity for MuSig2 users. The paragraph also notes that simply aborting in the presence of identical public keys would allow for a disruptive signer to permanently DoS-attack a session by copying the public key of another signer.
Updated on: 2023-06-15T18:49:19.772876+00:00