Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09B2997 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:29:02 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from mail-lf0-f45.google.com (mail-lf0-f45.google.com [209.85.215.45]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38077194 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:29:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lffz202 with SMTP id z202so38481557lff.3 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:28:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=MZHcMIj/9NeorDKA8FOkUjSpggypAL70txlGwL9brMM=; b=DXNySmMrOIZSxNs77/iRBg2kvQrHlavkms9BgtK3VkKc1y0hLywfrQkBNej0xORylk lwzjo7R9jaXymPnKmTWm4dHENiYGS5bvGc6rnbxn5uDCRXDZIjz/3bCmtcyILBTFYGMA Snl+XxWSPm2j6mjFZBpDa0s714ByIjU1moAi29ATxyYtzFZjMzJZQG12qwJLylQCQTcL xfvTfPdYrUwRWwVIA316jkopRJUFErJG6CWu7hIlTDgmvcHY1y+FPG6osYtX5or7JUcu y2h8QzBQJ/Ay9f0wgVq46EcQDmyta1EZfkj3v5a7kGM7ha2lERGq5a9ZL1N+WPO5DFBW TH8g== X-Received: by 10.194.111.198 with SMTP id ik6mr38119967wjb.96.1445282939432; Mon, 19 Oct 2015 12:28:59 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Christian Decker Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:28:49 +0000 Message-ID: To: Tier Nolan Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1130cfa23475c905227a2826 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on smtp1.linux-foundation.org Cc: Bitcoin development mailing list Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [BIP] Normalized transaction IDs X-BeenThere: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: Bitcoin Development Discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 19 Oct 2015 19:29:02 -0000 --001a1130cfa23475c905227a2826 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Yes, this has been pointed out in the PR as well. Transactions inputs must also be normalized by replacing malleable hashes with the normalized hashes. I will fix the spec and the implementation to reflect this :-) Regards, Christian On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:24 PM Tier Nolan via bitcoin-dev < bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Christian Decker via bitcoin-dev < > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > >> As with the previous version, which was using a hard-fork, the normalized >> transaction ID is computed only considering the non-malleable parts of a >> transaction, i.e., stripping the signatures before computing the hash of >> the transaction. >> > > > Is this proposal recursive? > > > *Coinbase transaction * > > * n-txid = txid > > > *Non-coinbase transactions* > * replace sigScripts with empty strings > * replace txids in TxIns with n-txid for parents > > The 2nd step is recursive starting from the coinbases. > > In effect, the rule is that txids are what they would have been if n-txids > had been used right from the start. > _______________________________________________ > bitcoin-dev mailing list > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev > --001a1130cfa23475c905227a2826 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Yes, this has been pointed out in the PR as well. Transact= ions inputs must also be normalized by replacing malleable hashes with the = normalized hashes. I will fix the spec and the implementation to reflect th= is :-)

Regards,
Christian

On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 5:24 PM Tier Nolan v= ia bitcoin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 3:01 PM, Christian Decker via bitc= oin-dev <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>= wrote:
As w= ith the previous version, which was using a hard-fork, the normalized trans= action ID is computed only considering the non-malleable parts of a transac= tion, i.e., stripping the signatures before computing the hash of the trans= action.

Is this proposal recursive?=C2=A0
=
Coinbase transaction

* n-txid =3D = txid

Non-coinbase tr= ansactions

* replace sigScripts= with empty strings
* replace txids in = TxIns with n-txid for parents

The 2= nd step is recursive starting from the coinbases.

In effect, the rule is that= txids are what they would have been if n-txids had been used right from th= e start.
_______________________________________________
bitcoin-dev mailing list
= bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mail= man/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
--001a1130cfa23475c905227a2826--