Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Whagb-00033T-1h for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 06 May 2014 08:25:13 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.213.181 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.213.181; envelope-from=pieter.wuille@gmail.com; helo=mail-ig0-f181.google.com; Received: from mail-ig0-f181.google.com ([209.85.213.181]) by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Whaga-0007Dm-61 for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 06 May 2014 08:25:12 +0000 Received: by mail-ig0-f181.google.com with SMTP id h3so2650105igd.14 for ; Tue, 06 May 2014 01:25:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.85.37 with SMTP id e5mr30342623igz.43.1399364706254; Tue, 06 May 2014 01:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.50.100.72 with HTTP; Tue, 6 May 2014 01:25:06 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 10:25:06 +0200 Message-ID: From: Pieter Wuille To: odinn.cyberguerrilla@riseup.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (pieter.wuille[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Whaga-0007Dm-61 Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Bug in key.cpp X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 May 2014 08:25:13 -0000 On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:12 AM, wrote: > You are right there is a bug in there. > > But the value is not 25% I think. Tinker some more. :-) > >> >> Afaict, 3 is a perfectly valid value, meaning 25% of sig-> key recoveries >> would fail erroneously... Values 2 and 3 are only needed in theory. They together shouldn't occur more than once in 2**127 (when the signature value is between the group size and the field size). That said, this is indeed a bug. -- Pieter