BIP 32: Add simpler explanations where I got confused originally reading this. #785
Conversation
Essentially I added the simple explanation for some things next to the more complex ones originally used. If I had these in there when I first came upon this document, I would have had a much easier time digesting it. Hopefully these changes help the next peson who reads it.
ddustin
changed the title
ddustin
changed the title
ddustin
changed the title
|
Pinging BIP author @sipa for feedback (thanks!) |
Co-authored-by: Jon Atack <jon@atack.com>
| @@ -51,10 +51,11 @@ Addition (+) of two coordinate pair is defined as application of the EC group op | |||
| Concatenation (||) is the operation of appending one byte sequence onto another. | |||
|
|
|||
| As standard conversion functions, we assume: | |||
| * point(p): returns the coordinate pair resulting from EC point multiplication (repeated application of the EC group operation) of the secp256k1 base point with the integer p. | |||
| * point(p): returns the public key for p. This is the coordinate pair resulting from EC point multiplication (repeated application of the EC group operation) of the secp256k1 base point with the integer p. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I find this to be somewhat cyclic. We define public/private keys in function of this operation (i.e., the corresponding public key to private key p is point(p)). The change here is adding the reverse that (i.e., defining point(p) as the public key to p).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah I'm in agreement with @sipa here. Points are used as public keys but aren't equivalent to them in certain use contexts.
| @@ -64,6 +65,8 @@ In what follows, we will define a function that derives a number of child keys f | |||
|
|
|||
| We represent an extended private key as (k, c), with k the normal private key, and c the chain code. An extended public key is represented as (K, c), with K = point(k) and c the chain code. | |||
|
|
|||
| When deriving child keys, a 'hardened' child key can only be generated using a private key. This provides security advantages but reduces the usefulness of HD key derivation. It is typically used to separate 'accounts' from each other. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd prefer the last sentence be dropped. Given the weird security properties of "normal" derivation, I think we should word things as though hardened derivation were the ordinary case, and non-hardened derivation is the one that has a sentence explaining why somebody would want to use it.
|
@ddustin mind updating per the new feedback? |
murchandamus
added
the
PR Author action required
Absolutely, will do. Traveling at the moment 👍 |
Essentially I added the simple explanation for some things next to the more complex ones originally used. If I had these in there when I first came upon this document, I would have had a much easier time digesting it.
Hopefully these changes help the next peson who reads it.