Post
Topic
Board Development & Technical Discussion
Re: [DISCUSSION] BIP-notatether-messageverify: Standardizes message verification
by
NotATether
on 25/07/2022, 15:51:19 UTC
Back to your message,

Hello NotATether.

This was my first bitcointalk post. I was trying to recover some altcoin airdrop for bitcoin holders and I needed to sign a message. Then I discovered it was not possible.

By the time, in 2018, nullius gave me some technical details about the problems for creating this standard.

Take a look, it might help you:

...

A lot of good links in that mailing list thread, but I think this one is going to be the most helpful - https://github.com/brianddk/bips/blob/legacysignverify/bip-0xyz.mediawiki . I'll study this draft BIP and see what I can get from it.




OK, so I apparently forgot that Taproot addresses do not even use ECDSA signatures in the first place. So I'm going to rule those out of the BIP.

According to @achow101, guessing the signature type from the prefix still makes ambiguous address types, so I'll have to figure out a different strategy to identify P2WPKH-P2SH and P2WPKH (P2SH and P2WSH have already been stiken out of this BIP).