Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 79F42F4E for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:53:36 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-io0-f175.google.com (mail-io0-f175.google.com [209.85.223.175]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B4172C4 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:53:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-io0-f175.google.com with SMTP id m83so10139031ioi.8 for ; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:53:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qyShQzynIDibJYlZg6UBl2BqTMihJzwOtUfSzx8SYQs=; b=PuLwHX64uHcgXRy5wkspXeT5FTef7psa9EGRlkMB9Y9zSiKvMbgq1MZwO8YXYy9Hcw 6DtObARfQJqT6rNUw+8Jfhu2QoXL/qhy3eugY9mIN4nri0OLh8aTj0Sv3X7Slyh40DtI 5ufV3HG+MiDsC6t+SlxrGLdZfy3TnmGlHHlU+WMdfP2gY0smB/vtlwBg0AD5qy+A0Imn Zf2vjfwkeb3YXgykqGzv8FbXOw8AaryFt0pcdVLiJ+aYhrvh4fRSggJqn3aRjdTZ3/za lDQVYuCssa76+4TRGIsPOccg7dYS8PAYi+1pjT1/fa9q4wy8o/K1K+qdTqodZWCnKzN8 8J+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qyShQzynIDibJYlZg6UBl2BqTMihJzwOtUfSzx8SYQs=; b=IL7Ersu8qJh6dGAMaVlocHio2ZFDlLpl6UmiNebkRewMVa5GFzLauFYY1SthQTnKVG IyJjdsCeyIhhCSrthKBLPrRc1Odik4gE8c5LU8sXO8K0rVKNXAMwBDS7XumLjTWlHJ2P SaLkqrUY+uIO0pwbO7hm1no08L2FqDC1IdbOZOAzwjTtecD83OfnEtxDu38ssM4pJmUs Lo9HueQetJy/Cuof9s+ts69t/qtuIAzK3yryeygkNA2dbIBRVDYXMFLWAHkTvOrEFsLp PXbWj7y1ohNSE+Ynw425LADcy0wvpgkGPaMmu2sJ2EJ7cY4IBhkB+JwabGBMWWB10Nod rKGw== X-Gm-Message-State: AElRT7FGVsWy11FlQnsfKLaJGmEmWAbSOqYGKUb9FTFfh/Q9Z787fedB q4QCXXK7GNuabK7ffNE6hC5AW4lxs8ashuf489c41A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELu1KSD1e1EBJY2sfaDUzOfLytPEHEYgPte9MH6TpFDqwBg0fhDWd5EVFCGsxViRgeVbJdF9AFaD4xBIvYA11fY= X-Received: by 10.107.135.157 with SMTP id r29mr10473087ioi.248.1521147215303; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:53:35 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.90.16 with HTTP; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:53:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: From: Jim Posen Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 13:53:34 -0700 Message-ID: To: Karl Johan Alm Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a113fbf206b5899056779afd5" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 21:02:40 +0000 Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] {sign|verify}message replacement X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 20:53:36 -0000 --001a113fbf206b5899056779afd5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > > Good question.. Since you don't really have the input(s), I think it's > fine to always assume sufficient time/height on CLTV/CSV checks. > In this general signing-a-script context, I think a verifier might want to see the time conditions under which it may be spent. The proof container could include an optional nLockTime which defaults to 0 and nSequence which defaults to 0xFFFF... > I think it would just use the default (SIGHASH_ALL?) for simplicity. > Is there a good reason to tweak it? > I took another look and there should definitely be a byte appended to the end of the sig so that the encoding checks pass, but I think it might as well be a 0x00 byte since it's not actually a sighash flag. --001a113fbf206b5899056779afd5 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Good question.. Since you don't really have = the input(s), I think it's
fine to always assume sufficient time/height on CLTV/CSV checks.

In this general signing-a= -script context, I think a verifier might want to see the time conditions u= nder which it may be spent. The proof container could include an optional n= LockTime which defaults to 0 and nSequence which defaults to 0xFFFF...
=C2=A0
I think it would just use the default (SIGHASH_ALL?) for simplicity.=
Is there a good reason to tweak it?

I t= ook another look and there should definitely be a byte appended to the end = of the sig so that the encoding checks pass, but I think it might as well b= e a 0x00 byte since it's not actually a sighash flag.

--001a113fbf206b5899056779afd5--