diff options
| author | Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> | 2014-07-18 22:56:32 +0200 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | bitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org> | 2014-07-18 20:56:38 +0000 |
| commit | b69683aae0d2bcd3573a61a29ee5f0b858906095 (patch) | |
| tree | 462207ca24e2d8bec18e8146a9a3900959b41ec6 | |
| parent | d661970000bb535f008080646ad20c63d1e9189b (diff) | |
| download | pi-bitcoindev-b69683aae0d2bcd3573a61a29ee5f0b858906095.tar.gz pi-bitcoindev-b69683aae0d2bcd3573a61a29ee5f0b858906095.zip | |
Re: [Bitcoin-development] Small update to BIP 62
| -rw-r--r-- | 15/f83b5d5e85a126f5a70c577108051268284bbd | 72 |
1 files changed, 72 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/15/f83b5d5e85a126f5a70c577108051268284bbd b/15/f83b5d5e85a126f5a70c577108051268284bbd new file mode 100644 index 000000000..1dd0ed59d --- /dev/null +++ b/15/f83b5d5e85a126f5a70c577108051268284bbd @@ -0,0 +1,72 @@ +Received: from sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.192] + helo=mx.sourceforge.net) + by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) + (envelope-from <laanwj@gmail.com>) id 1X8FCo-0003gD-BY + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 18 Jul 2014 20:56:38 +0000 +Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com + designates 209.85.223.176 as permitted sender) + client-ip=209.85.223.176; envelope-from=laanwj@gmail.com; + helo=mail-ie0-f176.google.com; +Received: from mail-ie0-f176.google.com ([209.85.223.176]) + by sog-mx-2.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) + (Exim 4.76) id 1X8FCn-0008W6-Lt + for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; + Fri, 18 Jul 2014 20:56:38 +0000 +Received: by mail-ie0-f176.google.com with SMTP id tr6so4977395ieb.21 + for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>; + Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:56:32 -0700 (PDT) +MIME-Version: 1.0 +X-Received: by 10.50.126.7 with SMTP id mu7mr44019123igb.20.1405716992387; + Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:56:32 -0700 (PDT) +Received: by 10.64.27.228 with HTTP; Fri, 18 Jul 2014 13:56:32 -0700 (PDT) +In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP3fA3gZ5u6yViBZpdTYxyFvZT=uOTDEnL797OueXf-16g@mail.gmail.com> +References: <CAPg+sBiTURdRAZbyk3guF5YzAAQebo8yY_TuXHUKYDEdLjDUdQ@mail.gmail.com> + <CANEZrP3fA3gZ5u6yViBZpdTYxyFvZT=uOTDEnL797OueXf-16g@mail.gmail.com> +Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 22:56:32 +0200 +Message-ID: <CA+s+GJAd00ba7SzoUYeGvTOoHRiysXtYmx4Cnq8xQLXZx_VwyQ@mail.gmail.com> +From: Wladimir <laanwj@gmail.com> +To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> +Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 +X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) +X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. + See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. + -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for + sender-domain + 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider + (laanwj[at]gmail.com) + -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record + -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from + author's domain + 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, + not necessarily valid + -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature +X-Headers-End: 1X8FCn-0008W6-Lt +Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Small update to BIP 62 +X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net +X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 +Precedence: list +List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe> +List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development> +List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net> +List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help> +List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>, + <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe> +X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2014 20:56:38 -0000 + +On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net> wrote: +> The rationale doesn't seem to apply to rule #4, what's so special about that +> one? + +> 4. Non-push operations in scriptSig Any non-push operation in a scriptSig invalidates it. + +Having non-push operations in the scriptSig is a source of +malleability, as there can be multiple sequences of opcodes that +evaluate to the same result. + +Wladimir + + |