HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
opentimestamps
opentimestamps-server
Python2020–2021
opentimestamps / opentimestamps-server

opentimestamps-server

OpenTimestamps Calendar Server

2Distinct people
2Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
272GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

OpenTimestamps Calendar Server

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 5:04:57 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by month2 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2020-08-19 20:15:00 UTC to 2021-06-06 16:52:34 UTC.

012020-08-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsAug 20202020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 commentsJan 20212021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 commentsJun 2021

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
Aug 20202020-08-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC101
Sep 20202020-09-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Oct 20202020-10-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Nov 20202020-11-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Dec 20202020-12-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jan 20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Feb 20212021-02-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Mar 20212021-03-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Apr 20212021-04-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC000
May 20212021-05-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC000
Jun 20212021-06-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-07-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

2 sources
Note that this is an example of the broader timestamped HMAC signature scheme concept. My Google-fu isn't up to the task today. But I'm sure I've seen proposed before, eg with something like Bitcoin as the timestamp provider. My OpenTimestamps project is a curious example where I actually made an effort to avoid implementing this by accident. tl;dr: It's a service that does Bitcoin timestamping. In the process, centralized servers generate "calendars" - the database of digests they've timestamped. Now, for disaster recovery the calendar servers have a HMAC with secret key to authenticate digests they've promised to timestamp. The idea being that the HMAC lets us get timestamps back from the community to re-add to the calendar in case the data somehow gets lost. For technical reasons, that HMAC "signs" the current time, and the output of t
Read the rest
hat HMAC gets timestamped securely with Bitcoin. But since OTS servers are not supposed to be trusted, that HMAC digest is deliberately truncated to 64 bits to make it feasible to brute force with significant effort, thus making them not useful as an actual timestamp: https://github.com/opentimestamps/opentimestamps-server/blob... This is ok for their intended purpose, because if you're willing to brute force 64-bits, I'm ok letting you add some junk to the OTS calendars in the event of a disaster. I'm actually considering using that scheme as a trusted timestamping mechanism for OTS, by simply revealing the HMAC keys after they've been timestamped by Bitcoin. They're already derived with a merkle tree from a single seed - each second gets a different HMAC key. To turn that into a verifiable signature you just need to derive all the keys in advance, construct a tweaked version of that merkle tree, and then publish the root. A full signature is then the HMAC output, and a path up the tree to the public root. The advantage for OTS is the amortized size of the signatures would be smaller than a ECC signature, plus being hash based it's a quantum resistant scheme.
In Galileo's Proposed Authentication Algorithm: Part 1

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.