To: bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
References: <d3497397-33c3-90c1-1be8-a733736eac0b@gmail.com>
	<1bb6cccd-3f6d-d62a-2825-4e6f46a4b525@mattcorallo.com>
	<dd2781a6-3e10-9f0c-6ee0-a2c070b7cf67@gmail.com>
	<CAB+qUq4wNv=-ZSibUvVCwYSE7Qw8xe8EH91KG6znUp1d7X=mdA@mail.gmail.com>
	<c898cc1c-d71c-de5c-aede-a2a4235656e0@gmail.com>
	<XiOYlqnc-qXA7EdhRL5FyNeLDM6D5HissnTjnmuLlRrh8K2upymkEcnZb3drGUafY8CKkWjRbVQauYyUfA5cZrnIpNs5UAqWkcpahibEBpc=@protonmail.com>
From: CryptAxe <cryptaxe@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d293b884-5f28-d2db-d7b6-860ee7b17703@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 12:51:43 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
	Thunderbird/52.2.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <XiOYlqnc-qXA7EdhRL5FyNeLDM6D5HissnTjnmuLlRrh8K2upymkEcnZb3drGUafY8CKkWjRbVQauYyUfA5cZrnIpNs5UAqWkcpahibEBpc=@protonmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Language: en-US
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Two Drivechain BIPs
Precedence: list

On 12/05/2017 08:49 PM, ZmnSCPxj via bitcoin-dev wrote:

> ...
> This vulnerability can be fixed if withdrawals are restricted to
> simple P2PKH or P2WPKH only,

Limiting the withdrawal outputs to P2PKH and perhaps P2WPKH (would there
be any network benefit to supporting witness pubkeys for withdrawals?)
wouldn't be too much work for me. The downside is that people might want
to withdraw to multisig scripts, or any other legitimate P2SH. If it
prevents a huge issue, then it is probably worth it.


> but in the presence of Scriptless Script and Bellare-Neven signatures,
> that may be sufficient to create the Theft Contract and the Accomplice
> Contract (but I know too little of Scriptless Script to be sure).
>
> Regards,
> ZmnSCPxj
>

I'm curious if anyone on this list could help answer this.

Thanks!