Unnamed repository; edit this file 'description' to name the repository.
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [bitcoindev] Knowledge Gathering: SPV Proof Applications In the Wild and Proposed
@ 2026-05-14 14:46 jeremy
  2026-05-14 19:09 ` [bitcoindev] " Ekrem BAL
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: jeremy @ 2026-05-14 14:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1281 bytes --]

Dear Bitcoin Developers,

SPV proofs are an important part of Bitcoin's Design, after all Satoshi 
thought they were worth including in the whitepaper!

As far as I'm aware, they have somewhat limited usage in the wild, mainly 
in Electrum and in Layer 2 Bridges, but it is important that they work 
correctly.

I'd like to gather a bit more detailed information on where and how SPV 
proofs are currently used, as well as any other proposed uses of SPV proofs.

In this Knowledge Gathering, I'd also like to glean a better understanding 
of what types of commitment structures might work "better" than others for 
SPV -- e.g., ability to cheaply verify if a block pays a particular 
address, spends a particular coin, and the exclusion forms (does not pay an 
address, does not spend a coin) etc, especially in the context of Layer 2 
Bridging.

Happy International Chihuahua Appreciation Day,

Jeremy

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/a3049fd5-e001-4d3a-9c99-d5629f47dfd8n%40googlegroups.com.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 1686 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

* [bitcoindev] Re: Knowledge Gathering: SPV Proof Applications In the Wild and Proposed
  2026-05-14 14:46 [bitcoindev] Knowledge Gathering: SPV Proof Applications In the Wild and Proposed jeremy
@ 2026-05-14 19:09 ` Ekrem BAL
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Ekrem BAL @ 2026-05-14 19:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2598 bytes --]

Hi Jeremy,

For Citrea/Clementine, we currently use SPV-style proofs in two main places.

First, on the Citrea side, the Bridge system contract uses Bitcoin 
transaction inclusion proofs to accept peg-ins/deposits. See:

<https://github.com/chainwayxyz/citrea/blob/487daa67fc54feb789b618a0ca2be1cc2f09b198/crates/evm/src/evm/system_contracts/src/Bridge.sol#L196>

The contract checks inclusion through Citrea's Bitcoin light client 
contract. More details here:

<https://docs.citrea.xyz/developer-documentation/system-contracts/bitcoin-light-client>

Second, in the Clementine Bridge proof, we use SPV proofs for verifying 
operator payout transactions. If an operator is challenged, the operator 
proves that there exists a payout transaction paying the withdrawal. See:

<https://github.com/chainwayxyz/clementine/blob/b711e92ef2725e8b3cdaacc2683583f11b5aec28/circuits-lib/src/bridge_circuit/spv.rs>

On your question about commitment structures, I think being able to verify 
that a particular coin was not spent in a block might be helpful, as it 
could make creating SNARK proofs for operator honesty easier in some bridge 
designs.

Best,
Ekrem BAL
On Thursday, May 14, 2026 at 10:47:59 AM UTC-4 jeremy wrote:

> Dear Bitcoin Developers,
>
> SPV proofs are an important part of Bitcoin's Design, after all Satoshi 
> thought they were worth including in the whitepaper!
>
> As far as I'm aware, they have somewhat limited usage in the wild, mainly 
> in Electrum and in Layer 2 Bridges, but it is important that they work 
> correctly.
>
> I'd like to gather a bit more detailed information on where and how SPV 
> proofs are currently used, as well as any other proposed uses of SPV proofs.
>
> In this Knowledge Gathering, I'd also like to glean a better understanding 
> of what types of commitment structures might work "better" than others for 
> SPV -- e.g., ability to cheaply verify if a block pays a particular 
> address, spends a particular coin, and the exclusion forms (does not pay an 
> address, does not spend a coin) etc, especially in the context of Layer 2 
> Bridging.
>
> Happy International Chihuahua Appreciation Day,
>
> Jeremy
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/17f62129-3f3e-4624-ac12-2c3ede886735n%40googlegroups.com.

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 3234 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2026-05-14 19:33 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-05-14 14:46 [bitcoindev] Knowledge Gathering: SPV Proof Applications In the Wild and Proposed jeremy
2026-05-14 19:09 ` [bitcoindev] " Ekrem BAL

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox