1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
|
Return-Path: <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org (smtp2.osuosl.org [140.211.166.133])
by lists.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69FCBC016E
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 21 Jun 2020 02:10:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 517758881A
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 21 Jun 2020 02:10:39 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at osuosl.org
Received: from hemlock.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id kHHXRJtn0zk7
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 21 Jun 2020 02:10:37 +0000 (UTC)
X-Greylist: domain auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6
Received: from mail-40141.protonmail.ch (mail-40141.protonmail.ch
[185.70.40.141])
by hemlock.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 85FAA8878B
for <bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>;
Sun, 21 Jun 2020 02:10:37 +0000 (UTC)
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2020 02:10:32 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com;
s=protonmail; t=1592705435;
bh=UUfrqmpdkMl90IR9OYuuci9Cf7aJcz2/wTvKX8Nmeno=;
h=Date:To:From:Cc:Reply-To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From;
b=dtK56BAd8/XtJbSn7s4Oo7UXKSTUdRb55XldlAS9Z+ru8mxPvNksjSA58MOBJyHjI
Wc+qrvGBK4s/iP2P15Q9fDbV9rAdqWzSP7ZSgN+UhbrHYFGFiEBlwCdt+LqREOQY0f
LKLogjzkNsEWwiOGBMz4E7/GsE4+MjuYD2EafZNI=
To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
From: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Reply-To: ZmnSCPxj <ZmnSCPxj@protonmail.com>
Message-ID: <v959z56ko0Nzdl9BGs-zRWIxIy9o960OfvH6bRszIC9_JI-zdtQuSb7fPD4L_VnngBp_nLMMfl_Nfd6ZLtSeZZRKhZoFO5Xxryvo6GT0zT4=@protonmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <wRX9uiX_fFrjZvlmgx3Sj64VA3DdXakJZJq2_7DHJWIS7QBlphgpaBDdm4SjdY4aij5pESsumww8iJw8QZe5mO8bPgpYFyp6eImF2xbaXR4=@protonmail.com>
References: <PtYNeePySy_thDHm8FwIIGEk32EjJpSmiwPctyEg0hOrLZEHjO1IBghm4MWY88g51K-XF2pf_JDnW0UdTL6QSbACEj21h9U1s5ITc_N3I6Q=@protonmail.com>
<67334082-5ABA-45C7-9C09-FF19B119C80D@mattcorallo.com>
<62P_3wvv8z7AVCdKPfh-bs30-LliHkx9GI9Og3wqIK6hadIG0d6MJJm077zac1erpPUy31FqgZjkAjEl9AQtrOCg4XA5cxozBb7-OIbbgvE=@protonmail.com>
<4c4f3a06-0078-ef6a-7b06-7484f0f9edf1@mattcorallo.com>
<CACdvm3Of_9zhNmzCxeK-z8oz6wU=8RuDjr0R9+yrGeFjLYz9pg@mail.gmail.com>
<20200619195846.fclw4ilngvbbf2kk@ganymede>
<20200619205220.fshbr7pbijaerbf2@ganymede>
<CACdvm3O+A5M17rqejzAMUzE+fxLdzqnDY2m5+rnc5C=nzyPp9g@mail.gmail.com>
<20200620103647.g62srlcxbjqpaqj6@ganymede>
<wRX9uiX_fFrjZvlmgx3Sj64VA3DdXakJZJq2_7DHJWIS7QBlphgpaBDdm4SjdY4aij5pESsumww8iJw8QZe5mO8bPgpYFyp6eImF2xbaXR4=@protonmail.com>
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>,
lightning-dev <lightning-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] [Lightning-dev] RBF Pinning with Counterparties
and Competing Interest
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, 21 Jun 2020 02:10:39 -0000
Good morning again,
> Good morning Dave,
>
> > ZmnSCPxj noted that pay-to-preimage doesn't work with PTLCs.[2] I was
> > hoping one of Bitcoin's several inventive cryptographers would come
> > along and describe how someone with an adaptor signature could use that
> > information to create a pubkey that could be put into a transaction wit=
h
> > a second output that OP_RETURN included the serialized adaptor
> > signature. The pubkey would be designed to be spendable by anyone with
> > the final signature in a way that revealed the hidden value to the
> > pubkey's creator, allowing them to resolve the PTLC. But if that's
> > fundamentally not possible, I think we could advocate for making
> > pay-to-revealed-adaptor-signature possible using something like
> > OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACK.[3]
>
> <snip>
>
> The signed message could be a signature to `SIGHASH_NONE`, finally an act=
ual use for that flag.
If you are going to embed it in an `OP_RETURN` in the same transaction, you=
also need `SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT`, otherwise you cannot embed the adaptor sig=
nature for spending from that transaction in the transaction being spent, i=
t also implies `A[p4s] =3D a[p4s] * G` is a one-time-use keypair.
Regards,
ZmnSCPxj
|
