summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>2022-05-08 02:19:57 +0000
committerbitcoindev <bitcoindev@gnusha.org>2022-05-08 02:20:07 +0000
commitd51fa333010f9a3bcad09eb304aea9edf2f33840 (patch)
treead9f35ee5d9f567b31c9f7000f4057b524c1af4f
parent2bef716f7a3e1836b875f229302bdad13a266541 (diff)
downloadpi-bitcoindev-d51fa333010f9a3bcad09eb304aea9edf2f33840.tar.gz
pi-bitcoindev-d51fa333010f9a3bcad09eb304aea9edf2f33840.zip
Re: [bitcoin-dev] Speedy covenants (OP_CAT2)
-rw-r--r--f6/8123f9a67189dfd6b4bf750926dabe015c2d17115
1 files changed, 115 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/f6/8123f9a67189dfd6b4bf750926dabe015c2d17 b/f6/8123f9a67189dfd6b4bf750926dabe015c2d17
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..dd2d1c03e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/f6/8123f9a67189dfd6b4bf750926dabe015c2d17
@@ -0,0 +1,115 @@
+Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
+Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [IPv6:2605:bc80:3010::133])
+ by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5891EC002D
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 8 May 2022 02:20:07 +0000 (UTC)
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
+ by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42CC74026F
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 8 May 2022 02:20:07 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
+X-Spam-Flag: NO
+X-Spam-Score: -1.601
+X-Spam-Level:
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5
+ tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1,
+ DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001,
+ FROM_LOCAL_NOVOWEL=0.5, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
+ autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
+Authentication-Results: smtp2.osuosl.org (amavisd-new);
+ dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=protonmail.com
+Received: from smtp2.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
+ by localhost (smtp2.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
+ with ESMTP id 5iuVdj4YWgEt
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 8 May 2022 02:20:06 +0000 (UTC)
+X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.8.0
+Received: from mail-40138.protonmail.ch (mail-40138.protonmail.ch
+ [185.70.40.138])
+ by smtp2.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 78A85401A1
+ for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
+ Sun, 8 May 2022 02:20:06 +0000 (UTC)
+Date: Sun, 08 May 2022 02:19:57 +0000
+DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
+ s=protonmail2; t=1651976403;
+ bh=jZFDwqwKVW8g7GOCTPkABhXphCmg9evC7hF8Q9VefDU=;
+ h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:
+ References:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:
+ Feedback-ID:Message-ID;
+ b=APhVUZQc9aXbRxPJq/YZgihyyDHiYu8bM1sadKpPl5ywzXRJL30zfIfQcr6gm1YvM
+ f/S4j8PMbx26kfUW6ikwTogOIrKO3Hh8qnAkxdSVLEwzDC0WsBdGW6TWlFqZhD4rpg
+ rfPDnaEv8/DSy/G2XOB4Zkb0Fdu+Qf/OadAt5JIw+CFkSX33QmiHv081zv9Q1PMlXo
+ LJsmutcVucA5XhLLE345Ljo1z4Cf7tzOf8RwEaHH1kN84TC+RsCznFn2aogOeSZ8te
+ mRAxJw1owV+je7H2nnTEExZpiycQI/F7pmhaLR/Y0wjSQCrPuRkO188h10Twa48SXp
+ a0erKfL3PzPjg==
+To: Nadav Ivgi <nadav@shesek.info>
+From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
+Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
+Message-ID: <6pDae6X_tAfMTldPPsad5CSHPF98NVbTf06JxRCs7RqJGyrOqLALsDHHa_3C5DbbfpAVnzLMWCn-7e0FwQO-TOk4XxWYIiaYomuA9NJjkEQ=@protonmail.com>
+In-Reply-To: <CAGXD5f2vLaZgEUG7eu6S9YQSSLeJ0LAM+i2o1ngVb=VmxS3Rrg@mail.gmail.com>
+References: <CABm2gDoivzQKFr6KqeqW6+Lx7xFVprRCUAn1k3X6P29NPzw+yQ@mail.gmail.com>
+ <1JO1xrnJ9GwGM4TgLH_rL_LpnZgSb1SyeEOJ9Gzc1VMbKUrmxSh-zUXKwFNvp_5wyiDtRviOf-gRJbrfbhOJl-qym1eEHXpoDAgjE9juucw=@protonmail.com>
+ <CABm2gDrdwMjLu=i0p2m4SZ_91xpr-RvwSSWOnS9jhaQ3uaCxPA@mail.gmail.com>
+ <CiNPwh37hW6iDk3mMg6G2QWMPS5ADUvSdySnNp6esOaloiVyoPwHGxOMLyG6mMGQnyf4iGcch12XfmOB2WnFcETwFwvRTSNSeBu27G9Cju8=@protonmail.com>
+ <CAGXD5f2vLaZgEUG7eu6S9YQSSLeJ0LAM+i2o1ngVb=VmxS3Rrg@mail.gmail.com>
+Feedback-ID: 2872618:user:proton
+MIME-Version: 1.0
+Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
+Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Speedy covenants (OP_CAT2)
+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
+Precedence: list
+List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev.lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/options/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
+List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/>
+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=help>
+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev>,
+ <mailto:bitcoin-dev-request@lists.linuxfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
+X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 08 May 2022 02:20:07 -0000
+
+Good morning shesek,
+
+> On Sat, May 7, 2022 at 5:08 PM ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@list=
+s.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
+> > * Even ***with*** `OP_CAT`, the following will enable non-recursive cov=
+enants without enabling recursive covenants:
+> >=C2=A0 * `OP_CTV`, ...
+> > * With `OP_CAT`, the following would enable recursive covenants:
+> >=C2=A0 * `OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK`, ...
+>
+> Why does CTV+CAT not enable recursive covenants while CSFS+CAT does?
+>
+> CTV+CAT lets you similarly assert against the outputs and verify that the=
+y match some dynamically constructed script.
+>
+> Is it because CTV does not let you have a verified copy of the input's pr=
+evout scriptPubKey on the stack [0], while with OP_CSFS you can because the=
+ signature hash covers it?
+>
+> But you don't actually need this for recursion. Instead of having the use=
+r supply the script in the witness stack and verifying it against the input=
+ to obtain the quine, the script can simply contain a copy of itself as an =
+initial push (minus this push). You can then reconstruct the full script qu=
+ine using OP_CAT, as a PUSH(<script>) followed by the literal <script>.
+
+ <OP_PUSH_length-of-script> OP_SWAP OP_DUP OP_CAT OP_CAT <rest of script=
+...>
+
+Ha, yes, looks like you are correct here.
+
+`OP_CAT` makes *all* covenant opcodes recursive, because you can always qui=
+ne using `OP_CAT`.
+
+By itself it does not make recursive covenants, but with probably any opcod=
+e it would.
+
+Looks like `OP_CAT` is not getting enabled until after we are reasonably su=
+re that recursive covenants are not really unsafe.
+
+Regards,
+ZmnSCPxj
+