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
|
Received: from sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.194]
helo=mx.sourceforge.net)
by sfs-ml-3.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)
(envelope-from <gavinandresen@gmail.com>) id 1Qx2Kw-000761-Gc
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 26 Aug 2011 19:45:06 +0000
Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com
designates 209.85.161.47 as permitted sender)
client-ip=209.85.161.47; envelope-from=gavinandresen@gmail.com;
helo=mail-fx0-f47.google.com;
Received: from mail-fx0-f47.google.com ([209.85.161.47])
by sog-mx-4.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)
(Exim 4.76) id 1Qx2Kv-000577-SC
for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;
Fri, 26 Aug 2011 19:45:06 +0000
Received: by fxg11 with SMTP id 11so4342824fxg.34
for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;
Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.223.22.8 with SMTP id l8mr2140370fab.105.1314387899612; Fri,
26 Aug 2011 12:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.152.20.6 with HTTP; Fri, 26 Aug 2011 12:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CANEZrP2FYjJXvB=kzu+wBcoGOyL=45QeDqLfyZONxYu-9M50Uw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CABsx9T1uw43JuvhEmJP0KCyojsDi1r7v6BaLBHz7wWazduE5iw@mail.gmail.com>
<CANEZrP2FYjJXvB=kzu+wBcoGOyL=45QeDqLfyZONxYu-9M50Uw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 15:44:59 -0400
Message-ID: <CABsx9T1RnwLZkBwOipXsscDUbMoiikFTbb2WMkGxhGDO9je3zA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Gavin Andresen <gavinandresen@gmail.com>
To: Mike Hearn <mike@plan99.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.
See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.
-1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for
sender-domain
0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider
(gavinandresen[at]gmail.com)
-0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from
author's domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
0.2 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Headers-End: 1Qx2Kv-000577-SC
Cc: Bitcoin Dev <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] New standard transaction types: time to
schedule a blockchain split?
X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>
List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,
<mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2011 19:45:06 -0000
> Whitelisting the basic CHECKMULTISIG form (assuming it can be made to
> work) seems uncontroversial, why not do it today?
That seems like the right way forward.
I just wrote a unit test and stepped through the CHECKMULTISIG code to
see exactly what the bug is, and the offending line is:
797 int isig = ++i;
798 i += nSigsCount;
It should be just int isig = i;
The result is CHECKMULTISIG expects one extra item on the stack, so
the workaround would be a standard transaction type of the form:
scriptSig: OP_0 sig1...m
scriptPubKey: m pubkey1...n n OP_CHECKMULTISIG
--
--
Gavin Andresen
|
