<p>bitcoinjs already has support for litecoin, a quick look at /src/network.js and the README reveals this.
<a href="https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806/test/integration/basic.js#L30" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806/test/integration/basic.js#L30</a></p>

<p>See how they set the network: litecoin variable, that is probably used consistently through the code (atleast for address generation).</p>

<p>Nothing really major changes for signing to be honest, take a look at <a href="https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-message" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-message</a></p>

<hr>

<p><strong>WIF and address generation</strong>
Do not take the warning about the cryptographically secure random number generator lightly. If you do not change it then you will constantly generate the same address and it will be horribly insecure.</p>

<pre><code>//import bitcoinjs libs
var bitcoin = require('bitcoinjs-lib') // v2.x.x
var bitcoinMessage = require('bitcoinjs-message')

//set a litecoin variable equal to its network type, which we'll use throughout the example
var litecoin = bitcoin.networks.litecoin

//let's generate a litecoin keypair from a string
//WARNING: YOU MUST REPLACE rng() WITH A FUNCTION THAT ACTUALLY RETURNS CRYPTOGRAPHICALLY SECURE RANDOM DATA!
function rng () { return Buffer.from('MAKE SURE THIS IS NEW RANDOM DATA EACH TIME RNG() IS CALLED') }

var keyPair = bitcoin.ECPair.makeRandom({ network: litecoin, rng: rng })


var wif = keyPair.toWIF()
//You should store the output of the variable wif here, this is the actual key to the litecoin address (contains the private key) and is crucial to signing messages, do not share this and handle with care.

var address = keyPair.getAddress()

console.log("wif: " + wif + "\n")
console.log("address: " + address + "\n")
</code></pre>

<p><strong>Message signing using WIF from example1</strong></p>

<p>This takes your WIF and then signs a message.</p>

<pre><code>//import bitcoinjs libs
var bitcoin = require('bitcoinjs-lib') // v2.x.x
var bitcoinMessage = require('bitcoinjs-message')

//set a litecoin variable equal to its network type, which we'll use throughout the example
var litecoin = bitcoin.networks.litecoin

// add the wif key you stored
var wif = 'WIF key goes here'

var keyPair = bitcoin.ECPair.fromWIF(wif, litecoin)
var privateKey = keyPair.d.toBuffer(32)
var message = 'This is an example of a signed message.'
var messagePrefix = litecoin.messagePrefix

var signature = bitcoinMessage.sign(message, messagePrefix, privateKey, keyPair.compressed)
console.log(signature.toString('base64'))
</code></pre>

<p>Replace the WIF by the one you generated in the previous example.</p>

<p><strong>Message verification using the address from example1, and signature output from example2</strong></p>

<pre><code>//import bitcoinjs libs
var bitcoin = require('bitcoinjs-lib') // v2.x.x
var bitcoinMessage = require('bitcoinjs-message')

//set a litecoin variable equal to its network type, which we'll use throughout the example
var litecoin = bitcoin.networks.litecoin

var address = 'THE ADDRESS FROM EXAMPLE1'
var signature = 'THE OUTPUT OF CONSOLE LOG OF EXAMPLE2'
var message = 'This is an example of a signed message.'
var messagePrefix = litcoin.messagePrefix

console.log(bitcoinMessage.verify(message, messagePrefix, address, signature))
</code></pre>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-15T03:30:21.653Z
any good example code  I can copy and just modify?
Patoshi パトシ
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-15T08:30:46.333Z
Hi duckx,

The above example is almost complete, I'll add address generation and edit the main post.
Penquin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-15T09:03:54.010Z
I've added everything to it: address generation, message signing and message verification.
Penquin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-16T23:01:20.213Z
function rng () { return Buffer.from('MAKE SURE THIS IS RANDOM DATA') }; var keyPair = bitcoin.ECPair.makeRandom({ network: litecoin, rng: rng }) --- Those 2 lines do not work as makeRandom does not take the network and rng arguments as I looked up the function definition.
Patoshi パトシ
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-17T11:10:07.707Z
I've fully based this code upon the example provided in the test suite.

makeRandom does take the rng argument: 
https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806d0df9a6a4a18878b973528a2f5c80a29e/src/ecpair.js#L87

Which then in turn returns a new ECPair that takes the network argument.
 https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806d0df9a6a4a18878b973528a2f5c80a29e/src/ecpair.js#L15
Penquin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-08T04:58:36.517Z
It seems like the sign function will generate the same signature every time, if one passes the same private key and the same message to be signed. That... isn't normal. Am I doing something wrong?
EvilJordan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-10T15:39:24.487Z
@EvilJordan I just tested it in bitcoin-core and it generates the same signature over and over again for the same address(private key) & the same message.
Penquin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-10T20:06:33.137Z
@Penquin The code is correct. The implementation I was using prior to this was non-standard, using a RNG and generating non-deterministic, but valid, results.
EvilJordan
CC BY-SA 3.0
2018-02-16T20:18:11.053Z
@EvilJordan it remains a good observation to make however. (re: deterministic signatures)
Penquin
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-15T00:24:08.310Z
2018-02-16T20:23:49.817Z
2018-02-16T20:23:49.817Z
Penquin
<p>I'm working with bitcoinjs, but is there a litecoinjs equivalent? I want to be able to sign and verify messages with my litecoin private key and also generate litecoin addresses from a string. How would one go about doing these functions with a javascript library if one exists? </p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-15T18:26:24.380Z
trying to generate a ltc address using a string and then use that ltc private key to sign a message.
Patoshi パトシ
CC BY-SA 3.0
2017-06-16T22:59:41.180Z
It's insecure if your not using another hash algorithm to strengthen it like scrypt that is used in the warp wallet generator. It's more secure than trying to write down your private key or seed somewhere. You can easily remember your brain wallet if done correctly. It's a silly misconception that *ALL* brain wallets are insecure, which is not true at all.
Patoshi パトシ
<litecoin><address-generation><message-signing>
How can I sign a message with a litecoin private key and also generate a litecoin address from a string?
Patoshi パトシ
# How can I sign a message with a litecoin private key and also generate a litecoin address from a string?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2017-06-12)

I'm working with bitcoinjs, but is there a litecoinjs equivalent? I want to be able to sign and verify messages with my litecoin private key and also generate litecoin addresses from a string. How would one go about doing these functions with a javascript library if one exists?

**Tags:** litecoin, address-generation, message-signing

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: trying to generate a ltc address using a string and then use that ltc private key to sign a message.  
> **username_0**: It's insecure if your not using another hash algorithm to strengthen it like scrypt that is used in the warp wallet generator. It's more secure than trying to write down your private key or seed somewhere. You can easily remember your brain wallet if done correctly. It's a silly misconception that *ALL* brain wallets are insecure, which is not true at all.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2017-06-15. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

bitcoinjs already has support for litecoin, a quick look at /src/network.js and the README reveals this.
<https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806/test/integration/basic.js#L30>

See how they set the network: litecoin variable, that is probably used consistently through the code (atleast for address generation).

Nothing really major changes for signing to be honest, take a look at <https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-message>

---

**WIF and address generation**
Do not take the warning about the cryptographically secure random number generator lightly. If you do not change it then you will constantly generate the same address and it will be horribly insecure.

```
//import bitcoinjs libs
var bitcoin = require('bitcoinjs-lib') // v2.x.x
var bitcoinMessage = require('bitcoinjs-message')

//set a litecoin variable equal to its network type, which we'll use throughout the example
var litecoin = bitcoin.networks.litecoin

//let's generate a litecoin keypair from a string
//WARNING: YOU MUST REPLACE rng() WITH A FUNCTION THAT ACTUALLY RETURNS CRYPTOGRAPHICALLY SECURE RANDOM DATA!
function rng () { return Buffer.from('MAKE SURE THIS IS NEW RANDOM DATA EACH TIME RNG() IS CALLED') }

var keyPair = bitcoin.ECPair.makeRandom({ network: litecoin, rng: rng })

var wif = keyPair.toWIF()
//You should store the output of the variable wif here, this is the actual key to the litecoin address (contains the private key) and is crucial to signing messages, do not share this and handle with care.

var address = keyPair.getAddress()

console.log("wif: " + wif + "\n")
console.log("address: " + address + "\n")

```

**Message signing using WIF from example1**

This takes your WIF and then signs a message.

```
//import bitcoinjs libs
var bitcoin = require('bitcoinjs-lib') // v2.x.x
var bitcoinMessage = require('bitcoinjs-message')

//set a litecoin variable equal to its network type, which we'll use throughout the example
var litecoin = bitcoin.networks.litecoin

// add the wif key you stored
var wif = 'WIF key goes here'

var keyPair = bitcoin.ECPair.fromWIF(wif, litecoin)
var privateKey = keyPair.d.toBuffer(32)
var message = 'This is an example of a signed message.'
var messagePrefix = litecoin.messagePrefix

var signature = bitcoinMessage.sign(message, messagePrefix, privateKey, keyPair.compressed)
console.log(signature.toString('base64'))

```

Replace the WIF by the one you generated in the previous example.

**Message verification using the address from example1, and signature output from example2**

```
//import bitcoinjs libs
var bitcoin = require('bitcoinjs-lib') // v2.x.x
var bitcoinMessage = require('bitcoinjs-message')

//set a litecoin variable equal to its network type, which we'll use throughout the example
var litecoin = bitcoin.networks.litecoin

var address = 'THE ADDRESS FROM EXAMPLE1'
var signature = 'THE OUTPUT OF CONSOLE LOG OF EXAMPLE2'
var message = 'This is an example of a signed message.'
var messagePrefix = litcoin.messagePrefix

console.log(bitcoinMessage.verify(message, messagePrefix, address, signature))

```

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: any good example code  I can copy and just modify?  
> **username_1**: Hi duckx,  The above example is almost complete, I'll add address generation and edit the main post.  
> **username_1**: I've added everything to it: address generation, message signing and message verification.  
> **username_0**: function rng () { return Buffer.from('MAKE SURE THIS IS RANDOM DATA') }; var keyPair = bitcoin.ECPair.makeRandom({ network: litecoin, rng: rng }) --- Those 2 lines do not work as makeRandom does not take the network and rng arguments as I looked up the function definition.  
> **username_1**: I've fully based this code upon the example provided in the test suite.  makeRandom does take the rng argument:  https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806d0df9a6a4a18878b973528a2f5c80a29e/src/ecpair.js#L87  Which then in turn returns a new ECPair that takes the network argument.  https://github.com/bitcoinjs/bitcoinjs-lib/blob/d853806d0df9a6a4a18878b973528a2f5c80a29e/src/ecpair.js#L15  
> **username_2**: It seems like the sign function will generate the same signature every time, if one passes the same private key and the same message to be signed. That... isn't normal. Am I doing something wrong?  
> **username_1**: @username_2 I just tested it in bitcoin-core and it generates the same signature over and over again for the same address(private key) & the same message.  
> **username_2**: @username_1 The code is correct. The implementation I was using prior to this was non-standard, using a RNG and generating non-deterministic, but valid, results.  
> **username_1**: @username_2 it remains a good observation to make however. (re: deterministic signatures)  

---

