musig: move explanation for aggnonce=inf to spec

This commit is contained in:
Jonas Nick 2021-12-31 20:56:49 +00:00
parent 4824220bb7
commit 69b392f3cb
2 changed files with 14 additions and 15 deletions

View File

@ -126,6 +126,19 @@ The algorithm ''NonceAgg(pubnonce<sub>1..u</sub>)'' is defined as:
** Let ''R<sub>i</sub> = R'<sub>i</sub>'' if not ''is_infinite(R'<sub>i</sub>)'', otherwise let R<sub>i</sub> = G''
* Return ''aggnonce = cbytes(R<sub>1</sub>) || cbytes(R<sub>2</sub>)''
===== Note on ''is_infinite(R'<sub>i</sub>)'' =====
If ''is_infinite(R'<sub>i</sub>)'' there is at least one dishonest signer (except with negligible probability).
If we would fail here, we will never be able to determine who it is.
Therefore, we should continue such that the culprit is revealed when collecting and verifying partial signatures.
However, dealing with the point at infinity requires defining a serialization and may require extra code complexity in implementations.
Instead, we set the aggregate nonce to some arbitrary point, the generator.
This modification does not affect the security of the scheme.
''NonceAgg'' (both the original and modified version) only depends on publicly available data (the set of public pre-nonces from every signer).
Thus in the multi-signature security game (EUF-CMA), we can consider ''NonceAgg'' to be performed by the adversary (rather than the challenger) without loss of generality.
The modification changes neither the behavior of the EUF-CMA challenger nor the condition required to win the security game (the adversary still has to output a valid forgery according to the unmodified MuSig2* scheme). Since we've already proved that MuSig2* is secure against an arbitrary adversary, we can conclude that the modified scheme is still secure.
==== Signing ====
Input:

View File

@ -362,21 +362,7 @@ int secp256k1_musig_nonce_agg(const secp256k1_context* ctx, secp256k1_musig_aggn
}
for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
if (secp256k1_gej_is_infinity(&aggnonce_ptj[i])) {
/* There must be at least one dishonest signer. If we would return 0
here, we will never be able to determine who it is. Therefore, we
should continue such that the culprit is revealed when collecting
and verifying partial signatures.
However, dealing with the point at infinity (loading,
de-/serializing) would require a lot of extra code complexity.
Instead, we set the aggregate nonce to some arbitrary point (the
generator). This is secure, because it only restricts the
abilities of the attacker: an attacker that forces the sum of
nonces to be infinity by sending some maliciously generated nonce
pairs can be turned into an attacker that forces the sum to be
the generator (by simply adding the generator to one of the
malicious nonces), and this does not change the winning condition
of the EUF-CMA game. */
/* Set to G according to the specification */
aggnonce_pt[i] = secp256k1_ge_const_g;
} else {
secp256k1_ge_set_gej(&aggnonce_pt[i], &aggnonce_ptj[i]);