Bitcoin Forum

Bitcoin => Development & Technical Discussion => Topic started by: minerr on August 27, 2013, 10:39:56 PM



Title: Signing a message
Post by: minerr on August 27, 2013, 10:39:56 PM
I'm trying to sign a message.  I'm signing it via Armory and get the following output:

-----BEGIN-SIGNATURE-BLOCK-------------------------------------
Address:    1xWZ7j1LEEQ3PPtp3i9ayLghJmNxFWvWk
Message:    "2013-Aug-27 06:27pm username: minerr rand: 108db"
            "b0472965645 purpose: testing sig"
PublicKey:  041ba4335fa1ab3e80dc9211fd9c0d7add65f319bd3c4a4478
            becf6b7d169f936a93e6fd2a4924917eab1d60e7fd3784ddf5
            3a8f9fd2561d9bba410a8366320662
Signature:  6e33622059967c72e19204084de05ca25fd53e20fa638cfa4c
            48a0d75ec7454e3069a58246bd8c1c7f3b3dda1d162f50c0ec
            ffa48f63b08a1721e66d4be82ecf
-----END-SIGNATURE-BLOCK---------------------------------------



The crazy thing about this is that in Armory this message gets validated, BUT in bitcoin-qt,  bitcoind, blockchain.info it's not valid.  Try it for yourself. 

This is driving me crazy.  Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Some more useful info:

blockchain.info, when validating outputs the following error "Error Verifying MessageSignature has the wrong length"

Do I have to broadcast this signed messsage or something?  What am I missing?




Title: Re: Signing a message
Post by: gmaxwell on August 27, 2013, 11:05:28 PM
AFAIK, Armory does not use the same compact signature format that other bitcoin software uses, it's only compatible with itself.
 


Title: Re: Signing a message
Post by: minerr on August 27, 2013, 11:09:21 PM
Ahh, that explains it.  Thanks for ending my frustration.


Title: Re: Signing a message
Post by: jackjack on August 27, 2013, 11:11:35 PM
The software for Armory handling bitcoin-qt signatures is ready
No ETA yet though


Title: Re: Signing a message
Post by: etotheipi on August 28, 2013, 01:44:54 AM
The software for Armory handling bitcoin-qt signatures is ready
No ETA yet though

Yeah, I was going to integrate the compatible message signing algorithm in the next release.  It's just that the next release is taking far longer than I expected.    Soon though!