Bitcoinâs privacy is pretty abysmal â after all, what else can you say when anyone in the world can look up any transaction using a web explorer?
But while thatâs the case today, developers have long been trying to find a fix, or at least improve it over time. One of bitcoinâs most famous developers, Greg Maxwell, even aroused quite a bit of interest when he proposed something called Taproot back in January.
Far from providing full bitcoin privacy, Taprootâs code offers a way to make all transactions on the blockchain look the same to outsiders. Still, chatter about the proposal has arguably faded as other projects caught the communityâs eye and bitcoinâs price tumbled.
Among those who havenât forgotten about the proposal, though, are bitcoinâs developers, as plenty of toiling has been going on behind the scenes. Mathematician Andrew Poelstra pulled together a mathematical security proof in April, while Xapo engineer and Bitcoin Core contributor Anthony Towns put forward an idea for potentially decreasing how much data the technique uses in July.
The continued work showcases why many believe Taproot to be a discovery that provides an âenormous privacy winâ for bitcoin, as Blockstream co-founder Pieter Wuille put it in a recent talk. Even better, itâs actually not a crazy difficult change to make to bitcoin.
âTaproot is simple enough it could probably go in straight away,â Towns told CoinDesk.
The problem, and itâs a big one, is itâs dependent on tech that doesnât exist yet.
Towns explained:
âWithout Schnorr, Taproot doesnât get you all the way to where you want to go.â
The reason is that Taproot would keep it a secret that any advanced payment is occurring on bitcoin.
More commonly known as smart contracts, there are a variety of complex transactions used in bitcoin, like the kind that enables the off-blockchain protocol lightning for more scalable bitcoin payments and other complex types that are still in development.
But because bitcoinâs ledger is public, itâs obvious when someone uses one of these transactions.
Taproot puts an end to that by making these transactions look the same as every other âboring payment,â as Maxwell put it in the technologyâs announcement post.
Yet, it canât do this without Schnorr, an upgrade to bitcoinâs signature scheme thatâs been on developerâs coding agenda for years. The signature scheme is supposed to be better than bitcoinâs current signature scheme âin basically every way.â And it enables Taproot because it allows signature data to be mashed together into one.
âSchnorr is necessary for that because without it, we cannot encode multiple keys into a single key,â Wuille continued in his presentation.
Schnorrâs just finally getting off the ground. In fact, it looks like itâs going to be bitcoinâs next crucial change, with Wuille recently publishing a (very) technical proposal detailing how it might one day be added to bitcoin.
But since Schnorrâs been taking years, developers have long been dreaming about what they can build on top once the technology is actually live.
As Towns put it, Schnorr is a âmore excitingâ change, but Taproot is âthe cherry on the top.â
Developers have long been thinking about other enhancements, including those enabled by Schnorr, though itâs worth noting that Taproot isnât the only important change being considered. Towns thinks the privacy enhancement might be rolled in with other upgrades.
âAs far as Iâm concerned, Taproot, Schnorr, Graftroot is a bundle that all goes together,â he said, referring to yet another technology Maxwell pioneered.
And it doesnât stop there. Towns guesses that still even other long-anticipated changes will go in at the same time, including MAST, a proposal to boost bitcoin smart contracts, and SIGHASH_NOINPUT, a change that could usher in a more reliable lightning network â the tech bitcoiners hope will help bring bitcoin to the masses.
Even though these technologies have different names and have been proposed at different times, Towns is starting to think of them as one thing.
There are so many proposed changes, in fact, developers have been grappling with which should be made first.
Wuille explained in his talk why itâs not such an easy decision. Thereâs a small pressure for deploying all these features together at once. Each time they deploy a new âconsensus change,â it requires a new addressing format.
Since the addresses are different than the old one, this makes it very obvious whoâs using the new feature â especially since not everyone is going to suddenly adopt the feature the day it launches. Itâs going to take time, just like past changes have taken time.
Thatâs a small hit to privacy. And doing this more than once would be even worse.
On the other hand, deploying all these changes together would be a mess.
Speaking of other changes, thereâs also so-called âsignature aggregation,â the most-hyped application of Schnorr, which could help to scale bitcoin even further. But since itâs so complex and needs further review, this is one change that developers think should be added to bitcoin later on.
But Schnorr might not ultimately prove to be a roadblock for Taproot.
In fact, Wuilleâs been focusing on a proposal to deploy Schnorr and Taproot together, partly because he thinks the privacy addition from Taproot is so exciting, calling it an âenormous winâ for smart contracts in bitcoin.
On the Schnorr front, Towns mentioned that developers are still working out some kinks, such as a hardware attack vector that Maxwell discovered. Developers are cagey to give code timelines, since upgrades often take longer than expected. And Schnorr is no different.
Earlier on, Poelstra was hopeful it could be deployed by the end of the year, giving bitcoin users a chance to decide whether to adopt it or not. But it all depends on how quickly developers can settle on a path for the change, code it up, and get it reviewed.
As Towns put it:
âYou canât come up with a proposal until you know what to stick in it. The only real delay is finalizing whatâs going into it. â
Tree root image via Shutterstock