{{ message }}
Repository navigation
BIP374: clarify why G is an input and fix wording nits - #2334
Merged
Merged
Conversation
fametrano
reviewed
Oct 20, 2026
fametrano
left a comment
fametrano
left a comment
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Concept ACK on the footnote fix. "Other curves" was wrong: BIP374 takes its notation from BIP327, which fixes secp256k1 and its order n, and n is not an input, so G is the only curve parameter that can change. The rewritten verification sentence, with A = a⋅G and C = a⋅B, is also clearer.
ViniciusCestarii
force-pushed
the
bip-0374-wording-nits
branch
from
October 20, 2026 17:05
ed5e2ef to
af1e6e2
Compare
theStack
approved these changes
Oct 22, 2026
jonatack
added
the
Proposed BIP modification
fametrano
added a commit
to btclib-org/ecc
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 22, 2026
…oses #332) The module docstring said BIP374 passes G in so that the algorithm serves another curve. The curve is not an argument: the 33-byte points, 32-byte scalars and tags fix secp256k1. G serves another generator on secp256k1. bitcoin/bips#2334 corrects the BIP's footnote the same way. Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Ferdinando Ametrano <ferdinando@ametrano.net>
fametrano
added a commit
to btclib-org/ecc
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 23, 2026
…oses #332) (#340) The module docstring said BIP374 passes G in so that the algorithm serves another curve. The curve is not an argument: the 33-byte points, 32-byte scalars and tags fix secp256k1. G serves another generator on secp256k1. bitcoin/bips#2334 corrects the BIP's footnote the same way. Signed-off-by: Ferdinando Ametrano <ferdinando@ametrano.net> Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While reading BIP 374 I doubted the footnote for why include G ("While all other BIPs have used the generator point from secp256k1, passing it as an input here lets this algorithm be used for other curves") because for it to be able to support other curves it would need more parameters such as the group order.
Looking at the original comment that suggested it, it was about supporting other bases in secp256k1 and not other curves.
This clarifies the footnote and also fix some other small nits.
cc @andrewtoth @RubenSomsen @theStack