BIP352 tracking issue

josibake commented at 11:59 am on September 26, 2023: member

This issue will be updated to reflect the current state of BIP352 integration.

PRs ready for review:

https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1698

Overall plan:

Pre-work / Refactors
- #28244
- #28246
- #25273
- #28560
- #30047
- #30048
- #30050
- #30051
Send and receive support in the Bitcoin Core wallet:
- libsecp module (cryptographic portion of the protocol: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/pull/1698
- Base protocol: #28122
- Sending: #28201
- Receiving: #32966
Light client support:
- Index for silent payment tweaks (depends on 28122): #28241
- New BIP157 filter type for tweak data (not started)
- Serve new filter type (not started)

josibake commented at 12:12 pm on September 26, 2023: member

Review comments from #28246 that can be done as follow-ups:

josibake commented at 12:52 pm on September 26, 2023: member

Signet address: tsp1qqwzyz4wvrxnpauh9wj5x0lycvhhf0ff6gv0v0cyc6fcss7knlw3vzquefh7c4j7et3u0f059zw8zzyd97e6j4h4ldfs06t6pen9904w4fvpdukyc

setavenger commented at 5:11 pm on September 27, 2023: none

@josibake Sent you some, using a light client so I hope this worked.

Signet: tsp1qqfnlnlnwwrcn7x09u0p0fm6l3698pw9s6mzlg6wv99dempzxmz53sqklscmpcwzkcmuvr4s503w220qgslyhfyxln3tqevfllmu6epvrlu5z457e

josibake commented at 9:44 am on September 28, 2023: member

@setavenger received, 0.00021000! ~~I tried sending it back but it appears your address is invalid~~ PEBCAK. I’d like to keep this issue focused on the integration for Bitcoin Core, but feel free to join the silent payments IRC channel (#silentpayments) or reach out on twitter (@josibake) so we can keep testing!

glozow added the label Feature on Sep 29, 2023

glozow added the label Wallet on Sep 29, 2023

theStack commented at 2:18 am on October 1, 2023: contributor

Move base protocol to libsecp as a module (not started)

FWIW, I’ve started digging a bit deeper into that and started a corresponding discussion in the libsecp256k1 repo: https://github.com/bitcoin-core/secp256k1/issues/1427 (still trying to figure out a sane interface…)

Sjors commented at 7:22 am on May 10, 2024: member

You can point to the actual BIP now in the description 🎉

Turtlecute33 commented at 3:41 pm on July 25, 2024: none

I genuinely think silent payments are a good idea and plan on using them myself once they’re production ready. However, I wonder if including silent payment support in Bitcoin Core is a good idea, or if instead it would be better to have a separate software on top of Bitcoin Core where the Silent Payments logic is handled - similar to how lightning network nodes or electrum servers are implemented.

From what I can see it will be possible to enable/disable Silent Payments support using the compilation flag, but most users don’t compile Bitcoin Core, they download it from the official website, and if the official release binary will have Silent Payments activated, this means that a lot of users will have code they don’t need in their nodes. From my point of view, Bitcoin Core should remain as minimal as possible, to decrease the surface of possible attacks, and to make it easier to update and maintain.

I’m interested in exploring the reasons behind this choice. Sorry if this might not be the best place for discussion, in case, let me know where I can ask!

josibake commented at 12:02 pm on July 26, 2024: member

Hey @Turtlecute33 , this issue is meant to track the status of the PRs and keep track of any follow-ups that might arise. I don’t think it’s a good place for a general discussion on what should or shouldn’t be in Bitcoin Core. I’m not sure of a good place for meta discussions about the project but I’m happy to continue this conversation in the #silentpayments IRC channel

BIP352 tracking issue #28536