[TOOL] Verify Bitcoin Signed Message - Taproot Support - shareable link

[examplens]

Considering overall domain traffic, most of my traffic is direct link, and the second is google. Bitcointalk is 5th place.

"Direct" is traffic when someone types your domain directly into a browser. I assume a small part of that is traffic you generated while developing this tool.
Also, "direct" traffic can occur if Cloudflare eats the "referrer" and displays fake direct. Often links from forums or Telegram lose the referrer header, so they show up as direct.
In general, it's not a big deal. You are interested in the traffic of real people anyway. This is just a short explanation for a better understanding of the structure of visits in your statistics.

I have to admit that I am also surprised by the traffic from DuckDuckGo. Obviously, the owner of the site is a good source of traffic.

[bitmover]

Congratulations bitmover.
I searched on DuckDuckGo with the keyword bitcoin message verifier, and the first result showed your website.
You have done a good job. However, I didn’t see the PGP message verifier tool on DuckDuckGo. I am not sure if I searched with weird keywords.

I have to admit that I am also surprised by the traffic from DuckDuckGo. Obviously, the owner of the site is a good source of traffic.

thanks

I have spent quite some time to improve Google, bing and duckduckgo SEO.
I wasn't able to make a good job on Yandex, I always had problems with their login (their emails never arrive so I am never able to login there).

[bitmover]

If you need help with BIP-322 it might help to checkout these two libs:
- https://github.com/btcsuite/btcd/pull/2521
- https://github.com/ACken2/bip322-js
  - Or the simplified Exodus version: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@exodus/bip322-js

Would be great to add that support

Done!!

Using Mitchell suggestion, I used this library (https://github.com/ACken2/bip322-js).

I noticed that my signatures generated from sparrow were not working, because sparrow adds a prefix smp before the signature, making the signature invalid base64



I found that really odd. After a bit of research, I found out that there are other prefixes, such as ful and pof (https://bips.dev/322/) which shouldn't be used in signed messages so I didn't add support for those prefixes.

Anyway, I added some checks to automatically remove smp and smp: from the signatures.
I am trying to make this tool work for most wallets possible.

If anyone uses other wallets with taproot support, I would like to see if it works here 

Anyone curious cann test with this message:

Code:

-----BEGIN BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----
This is taproot message
-----BEGIN SIGNATURE-----
bc1psmy98zpvh5vrfxcrmekmv74k2zdlmdzvs7pnyetd8a3v6tjt2apq2q7x72
smpAUGhpZub60ECot4oXnxrq+o2Bkvia8293FQUuja0rDGZ4ODg8N1mA5KKMOjafcYRO4OmegZsWk9rcBjxKjRVh0DvAQ==
-----END BITCOIN SIGNED MESSAGE-----

Verified ✅