<xmrusercz:matrix.org> This can still be solved.

<rbrunner7> @xmrusercz:matrix.org: What do you refer to? What can be solved?

<rbrunner7> Meeting in about 1 hour

<rbrunner7> Meeting time. Hello! monero-project/meta #1465

<sneedlewoods_xmr:matrix.org> Hey

<jpk68:matrix.org> Hello

<jberman> waves

<rbrunner7> Ok, let's start with the reports from last week

<jpk68:matrix.org> Me: finishing touches for the I2P SAM patch (hopefully), random patches, working on a potential spec for signing with hardware wallets

<sneedlewoods_xmr:matrix.org> mostly worked on rebasing the wallet-cli and wallet-rpc PRs onto polyseed (and all the other stuff that got merged recently)

<rbrunner7> @jpk68:matrix.org: What would that spec specify?

<jeffro256> Howdy

<jberman> me: we launched the FCMP++ & Carrot beta stressnet v3, and I'm preparing all upstream FCMP++ consensus integration PR's at the moment (FCMP++ verify tooling PR is here: monero-project/monero #11407 )

<rbrunner7> Nice how it all comes together bit by with with FCMP++. Fascinating to watch

<rbrunner7> *bit by bit

<jpk68:matrix.org> rbrunner7: It would expose a generic USB interface (or some other transport) for communication between signing devices and wallet software. It's based on vtnerd's CBOR {en,de}coder (#10659)

<jpk68:matrix.org> I may be able to upload a draft gist soon. Messages are described with CDDL, written up in a Markdown document

<jeffro256> Me: working on monero-compat github.com/jeffro256/monero-compat. Got v0.18.0.0 plus compilation fixes to compile, fixing GitPython bugs, etc. Trying to get to the point where the test cases would have caught monero-project/monero #11412

<rbrunner7> Ah, I see, so that hardware wallet manufacturers would hopefully come towards us a good part of the way, instead of us implementing complex protocols in our codebase

<jpk68:matrix.org> I suppose, yes, though it doesn't solve the issue of having to use Trezor's new protocol

<jpk68:matrix.org> github.com/bitcoin-core/hwi

<jpk68:matrix.org> ^ Design is somewhat based on this

<rbrunner7> Certainly worth an attempt, although we probably have nowhere near the weight of Bitcoin ...

<jpk68:matrix.org> In practice, you could quite easily make a Python script that uses Trezor's hardware wallet libraries + Protobuf, and then have it act as a middleman (that is, speaking "monero-hwi" to the wallet, and Protobuf/THP to the device)

<vtnerd> Oops late, but present

<rbrunner7> Ok :)

<vtnerd> I suspect most hardware manufacturers are going to say use our existing API and deal with it

<rbrunner7> Like some game of poker

<jpk68:matrix.org> It would be great to not have to deal with Abseil and all of that other BS that comes with Protobuf

<jpk68:matrix.org> Not to mention the new Trezor protocol abomination

<rbrunner7> Most = 3, at the moment, as far as I know, I mean hardware wallets with XMR support

<rbrunner7> Or did I miss some that joined lately?

<vtnerd> Yes. I wrote a protobuf read/write that works except for vector/arrays.

<vtnerd> And implements the new encoder/decoder you mentioned

<jpk68:matrix.org> As tobtoht remarked a few weeks/months ago, hardware wallet vendors have too much control of our dependencies

<jpk68:matrix.org> I agree with this

<jeffro256> @vtnerd: Well the API with the HW device would remain the same, ostensibly we would add a bridge between HW-specific code and the core code

<vtnerd> The trezor protocol is insane, I cant believe that got pushed out

<jpk68:matrix.org> They may have suspected LLMs would be able to help with reviewing it, or writing its code for other projects

<rbrunner7> Even with LLMs you are not forced to implement something really complex, seems to me

<jeffro256> So the data flowing over the USB or Bluetooth would remain the same, so that API remains constant , but now there's data flowing between the core code and separate Monero-Trezor bridge process or something similar

<jpk68:matrix.org> @jeffro256: It might be good to have a separate 'core' repo for these scripts, with Python ostensibly being our best bet

<jpk68:matrix.org> TS and Rust are also available, however

<jeffro256> The Monero-Trezor bridge could also be a shared library, although that has some security implications

<jpk68:matrix.org> You mean, Trezor or another manufacturer would be creating that library?

<jpk68:matrix.org> This could also be integrated into the GUI, if people are willing to bundle Python with it

<rbrunner7> The complexity would still be there, but least out of the core code, right?

<rbrunner7> *at least

<jpk68:matrix.org> Yes, unless vendors implement 'our' protocol

<jpk68:matrix.org> In my personal opinion, it might be prudent to just keep existing Ledger/Trezor code in the main repo, until it's no longer supported, without adding further support for new protocols

<jpk68:matrix.org> I don't think THP integration will be happening any time soon, and doing so would require a lot of code

<rbrunner7> Frankly, I currently don't see many other really feasable options anyway.

<jpk68:matrix.org> I have a rough plan for how that (THP integration) could be done (and it would actually not require any new dependencies), but it's like 2-3,000 lines of dense code using libsodium to implement parts of the Noise protocol, with handshakes and everything

<jpk68:matrix.org> I'm not experienced enough to be able to comfortably write that

<rbrunner7> Ok, probably this needs time to develop further, hopefully including some moves - finally - by the manufacturers

<rbrunner7> If we are through with the reports, and the hardware wallet discussion, I have a little question to the room

<rbrunner7> I was preparing a post for Polyseed and remembered we once had a quite long discussion about Polyseed, encryption and plausible deniability

<rbrunner7> I could not find it again, however, and want to ask whether somebody knows where it is

<rbrunner7> What I can say that this isn't it, it's already Tevador's reaction to that discussion: tevador/polyseed #13

<rbrunner7> I think it was a GitHub discussion

<rbrunner7> Please post here if you know something, thanks!

<rbrunner7> Alright, something else for today's meeting, anybody?

<rbrunner7> Does not seem to be the case. So thanks everybody for attending, read you again next week!

<jpk68:matrix.org> Is there any chance it was on Reddit, this discussion?

<rbrunner7> Pretty sure that no

<rbrunner7> There once was a post with some interesting opinions titled "I don't like Polyseed" however

<sneedlewoods_xmr:matrix.org> Thanks everyone. (sorry, I don't remember which discussion you're talking about)

<rbrunner7> Ahh, you are much too young for that :)

<rbrunner7> No, that was 2 years ago, at least, as can be seen from the date of the Polyseed issue

<rbrunner7> Maybe Google has not indexed it, or not anymore, or my search power slowly bleeds out of me ...

<rbrunner7> And no, I won't ask an AI, no way

FYI, Polyseed v3.0.1 has been released with 3 bug fixes in the library: github.com/tevador/polyseed/releases/tag/v3.0.1

<rbrunner7> Thanks for the info, tevador!