Skip to content

BIP 119: Add another benefit for commiting to an input's index#996

Closed
benthecarman wants to merge 2 commits intobitcoin:masterfrom
benthecarman:bip119-sig-hash-single
Closed

BIP 119: Add another benefit for commiting to an input's index#996
benthecarman wants to merge 2 commits intobitcoin:masterfrom
benthecarman:bip119-sig-hash-single

Conversation

@benthecarman
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@benthecarman
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

cc @JeremyRubin

@JeremyRubin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Can you add another sentence clarifying what "to be planned around
SIGHASH_SINGLE" means?

You can add a sentence like: "were the input index not to be committed, X would happen, which would be undesirable because of Y"

@JeremyRubin
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Based on what you describe I don't see it as an exploitable issue.

E.g., imagine an output <H> CTV <K> CHECKSIG. Assuming H does not commit to index, and K does sighash single, then the signature is only valid if it is at the correct index, right? So having it redundantly with CTV doesn't matter.

Can you make an example where concretely a bad outcome happens? It may just be me, but I'm not seeing it.

@benthecarman
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@JeremyRubin you're right

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants